Well, not so much new , it will be a different car as it's a year old.
I'm getting a Subaru Legacy diesel estate today and my long term hire car is going back for good.
I'm rather excited about it as I've never even sat in a Suburu let alone driven one. (In case you ask, it's a company car so I've no choice. It's not like I'm parting with my own cash and buying a car blind)
Anyway, as it's quite an unusual car, I'll report back later with my initial thouhts.
a900ss
|
Shame it's not new new. I'll never forget the lovely smell in the first new car Dad bought (when I was 14) - a Peugeot 504 Ti.
Mind you, new cars these days don't seem so aromatic (there's probably a good Health & Safety reason why, to do with volatile compounds, etc. ...)
Last edited by: Boxsterboy on Fri 30 Jul 10 at 09:37
|
www.youtube.com/watch?v=JwgkdW22xrc
Is that it above?
The smell of nice new carpets is gorgeous but after 1 year they tend to stink of wet dog.
|
|
I had a new Sierra in 1985, It stank so badly of fish glue that Nicole wouldnt travel in it.
|
i hate dog smells
sorry Dog./........
|
|
The worst smelling car I've been in was a Standard Vanguard. The owner had been sick on the carpet, right under the heater air outlets! In the end the only way he could escape the smell was to sell the car.
|
dont buy a car off a fisherman
you cant get rid of the maggots
(took me 2 weeks and a complete removal of the interior)
and how come they came in so many colours
yelow
red
white
blue
just sick....
|
>>i hate dog smells, sorry Dog./........
You've erd about my 'feat' then?
|
>> probably a good Health & Safety reason why, to do with volatile compounds, etc. ...
A trade plater I picked up once told me that stevedores must have the windows open on factory-fresh cars, as the fumes from burning off grease, glue etc could prove fatal! I don't know how true that is...
|
>> must have the windows
>> open on factory-fresh cars, as the fumes from burning off grease, glue etc could prove
>> fatal! I don't know how true that is...
>>
Dunno about fatal, but a 'new' car parked in the sun will produce so much hideous plasto-fume from the dash and fittings that you will get a massive headache and be nauseous for a few days afterwards if you try to drive it without the windows open.
Oh, and if you run a clean paper towel over the inside of the windshield, you'd be amazed at the gunk it picks up.
|
>> I'm rather excited about it as I've never even sat in a Suburu let alone
>> driven one. (In case you ask, it's a company car so I've no choice. It's
>> not like I'm parting with my own cash and buying a car blind)
Tell us all about it a900ss, if you read mainstream reviews about Legacy's, they tend to be a bit luke warm about them, however, most people who own them love them despite the thirsty petrols. It'll be interesting to see how reliable the diesel will be.
|
>> most people who own them love them despite the thirsty petrols
Certainly do! The diesel with the old shape body is a good combo. They don't have the big fat wodge of torque low down like, say, a VW, but drive accordingly, give it some revs and you'll enjoy it.
Post a review over at www.uklegacy.com as well.
|
Enjoy! I really miss my Outback.
There are loads of new Outbacks in the US, but the new model is so boring to look at compared to the last version. Pity.
|
>> the new model is so
>> boring to look at compared to the last version. Pity.
Yes, I think it looks like a Vectra from some angles. I'd like to know who works in Subaru's design house.
Last edited by: corax on Mon 2 Aug 10 at 09:26
|
Well, I got the Subaru Legacy Diesel on Friday and have done about 300 miles in it since then. My first impression of being in the car is that it is very Mercedes like. Its materials and the way its switches clunk and click are very Mercedes. It is also very well designed with things like little shopping hooks in the boot, back seats that come down with only one button and a powerpoint in the armrest cubby hole.
The one thing I am not so sure about on the inside is the seats, they have very short squabs. I reckon they need to be circa 2 inches longer for correct support and I guess I’ll find out on the first long journey. I regularly do 8-10 hour journeys in a day so this could be an issue.
Driving wise it is completely different to every diesel I have ever driven. I’m used to lazy, torquey engines that pull from about 1200RPM and run out of puff just as soon. You cannot be lazy with this engine. It needs at least 1600RPM on the dial but preferably over 2000RPM for decent pull (even though peak torque is delivered at 1800RPM according to the specs). It’s not an issue though as the engine isn’t rough at higher revs like normal diesels, it is very petrol like. It is even 6 cylinder like in terms of refinement above 2000RPM I’d say (not below 2000 RPM though).
The power delivery is VERY linear. No surging lump of torque like a regular diesel followed by a huge tail off. This engine thrives by going further up the rev range. It actually feels quite lifeless compared to regular diesels but judging by the way most cars are going back in the rear view mirror, it must be a lot faster than it feels.
Economy appears to be poor. Although Subaru claim it delivers similar economy to it’s 2WD peer group I was always sceptical for the 4WD car. Recent cars of a similar size I have had delivered around the 50MPG mark for my driving (measured brim to brim so accurate), this Subaru is delivering between 40 and 42 according to the computer. However I am driving higher up the rev range than normal so I’ll have to give it a few weeks for my driving to acclimatise to the engine power delivery before I pass complete judgement.
Going back to my original feeling of being Mercedes like, I do like this car but I think this is a car than will deliver over time rather than deliver quick test drive thrills.
a900ss
|
|
Yes - my first drive in an Outback was fine but not "Oh wow!" but after three years I was genuinely sad to see it go. The first car I can say that about.
|
|
Just to add 'fuel' (escuse the pun) to fire the fuel consumption obsession thread. The Legacy has just done its first brim to brim and it recorded 40.2MPG. Not that great for a 2.0 diesel. Like I said, the AWD system is seriously effecting consumption in real life even if it doesn't effect it that much according to official figures.
|
a900ss, could it also be the lack of low-end torque / need to rev which you mention that is impacting economy as well?
I've found that a number of modern 2.0L diesels (my experience is with VAG and Ford) lack torque below 2K rpm. Higher revs often equate to lower mpg?
|
It's true that diesel engines now have a much more linear (petrol-like?) delivery across a wider rev range, which comes at the expense of the muscular bottom end delivery of older generation engines like the VAG PD.
I also think in fairness to Subaru that fuel economy on many of the latest generation diesels isn't as good as it was on an equivalent from 5 years ago. The big advances in performance, refinement and (most directly, I suspect) particulate emissions reduction have imposed certain penalties in this area.
Sounds like a very interesting car though.
|
|
The subaru diesel engine, is not like other diesels, and that includes fuel economy. Its not an economic unit, FWD or AWD or not.
|
>> The subaru diesel engine, is not like other diesels, and that includes fuel economy. Its
>> not an economic unit, FWD or AWD or not.
Better than 25mpg from the petrol though.
|
...It's true that diesel engines now have a much more linear (petrol-like?) delivery across a wider rev range...
That's my experience with the 2.0TDCi in the CC3.
It reminds me a little of the pushrod petrol engine in the Cortina - it revs cleanly, if not willingly, and runs out of puff at 4-5,000rpm.
Power delivery is fairly linear, possibly helped by the dreaded DMF.
The 1.8TDCi in my hatchback Focus was more like a diesel, bags of low end grunt and a bit peaky, torque-wise.
|
|
I had a Legacy Tourer diesel and now I've got a 2010 Outback diesel, same engine but 6 speed instead of 5 and the DPF is changed. The extra gear seems to make a decent difference when cruising but I preferred the first 3 of the 5 speeed's ratios. I'm getting 43mpg not hanging about and I used to get the same as you in my Legacy. My Legacy also was a company car so the relatively low emissions meant that at the time it was the least expensive AWD or 4WD car available in terms of BIK tax. I guess by now BMW or Audi have got a lower emissions unit with stop start etc. I'm a big fan of the AWD traction in the damp (and especially the snow!) and the overall stability of the car and the fact that it isn't mainstream.
|
>> I'm a big fan
>> of the AWD traction in the damp (and especially the snow!) and the overall stability
>> of the car
Yep, I'm looking forward to the winter strangely!!!!
and the fact that it isn't mainstream.
>>
Agree completely. I've had all the german cars and kinda like the fact it is a leftfield choice that only those in the know appreciate. (I do have a thing for MB's though, I'm sure I'll have another some point down the road)
|
|
Well I have the car just under a month now and 3,000 miles. Still disappointed with economy. Brim to brim it's averaged 38.5MPG...
|
But do you like it. How much would you save if it did 45mpg?
I am planning my next car. I wanted (and want?) an Audi A5 Sportback. I could save lots getting a BMW 520d SE. Dilemmas eh.
|
>>
>> I am planning my next car. I wanted (and want?) an Audi A5 Sportback.
>>
Nice choices, the A5 has only four seats remember.
|
>> Nice choices, the A5 has only four seats remember.
So did the Passat CC which has 5 seats now. But I rarely ever need more than 4 seats. Usually 2 or even 1.
|
>> But do you like it. How much would you save if it did 45mpg?
>>
Nothing actually as I have a fuel card. I know I'm being a bit of an pfd complaining about MPG when I don't pay for it. Perhaps what I really dislike is the range of the car. It struggles to do 500 miles on a tank whereas I'm more used to 700; I don't like the faf of filling up so if I can do it less frequently that's a bonus.
With regards to the rest of the car, I'll update this thread later.
Thanks
a900ss
Last edited by: VxFan on Thu 26 Aug 10 at 01:31
|
>> Perhaps what I really
>> dislike is the range of the car. It struggles to do 500 miles on a
>> tank whereas I'm more used to 700; I don't like the faf of filling up
>> so if I can do it less frequently that's a bonus.
Be glad you don't have a petrol. My one niggle with mine is that I'm constantly filling up. Leave London with a full tank, arrive in Brecon Beacons, say, and I'm wanting to fill up before going to where we're staying. Every 250 miles.
Manage about 33 on a run, computer claims an average 28 including quite a bit of slow London traffic sometimes measurable in litres per mile...
|
"very Mercedes like"
But reliable as well! What's not to like... :-)
|
New car today! - Boxsterboy
