Find Reviews by Make:
Subaru has a new motto: "The customer comes first." As proof of their dedication to this promise, they extolled the virtues of their new Forester. Apparently, it was the "first crossover"– even though the Japanese automaker's marketed the model for years as a SUV. The latest iteration of the slab-sided Subie is no longer so slab sided; it's longer, wider and taller. BUT a tighter turning radius makes it easier to park! Other changes include a larger rear seat (that reclines), more torque in both the regular and turbo engines and a new rear suspension. The only question left unanswered is this: if customers now come first, where the Hell did they fall in Subaru's previous hierarchy?
[Reported by Sajeev Mehta]
18 Comments on “Subaru Puts Customers First, New Forester Second...”
Read all comments
As a dedicated Subaru-loyalist, it is painful to watch the company slowly commit brand suicide with bland designs, buffet-busting curb weights, and pitiful fuel efficiency.
I suppose their move to the middle will net them more customers in the short-run, but they are losing the essence of the company.
Sube aficionados aren’t looking for a “Toyota, but worse”. They want practical all-wheel drive, ugly-betty styling, durable snow-goats.
I propose a new slogan: “Keep Subaru Weird”.
rollingwreck: Those designers went to Honda (see my comment on the Pilot Prototype). I agree the fuel efficiency is pretty awful for such a small car – I had an Outback wagon for a year and could only muster an overall average of 22.4mpg (yes I am OCD about my gas receipts). As a point of reference, my LS2-powered GTO has averaged 21.9mpg since I’ve owned it. (I drive probably 80% highway/20% city just for reference)
Heck I drove my dad’s 15 year old Subie down in Florida a few months ago and was getting 30-32mpg! Of course his is a FWD lightweight compared to today’s cars but it was a heck of a lot more fun to drive.
Heck I drove my dad’s 15 year old Subie down in Florida a few months ago and was getting 30-32mpg! Of course his is a FWD lightweight compared to today’s cars but it was a heck of a lot more fun to drive.
I own a 12 year old Legacy with AWD, it still gets 31mpg on the highway. I have no idea what I will replace it with when it finally croaks (hopefully in 2015 or thereabouts). Sube has dumped their low-cost Legacy Wagon and moved into all kinds of heavy, upscale machines with truly pitiful mileage.
It is like they are pulling a Saab — attempting to push the brand where it really, really should not go and alienating their core audience.
I have been shopping for a basic AWD 8+ inch ground clearance vehicle for about a year. Recently I tested the Nissan Rogue. Pretty much everything the Subarus are and a couple of grand cheaper. Still waiting for Subaru to uncouple stablility control and leather. With the newer Cute utes coming on line I am afraid Subaru is toast.
If Subaru wants to put customers first they could start by ditching the marketing speak and calling the Forester what it is–a station wagon.
David: in the flesh, the Forester looks more like an SUV. The nose has gotten seriously blocky and butch…and the whole rig is taller and boxier.
“rollingwreck :
January 13th, 2008 at 6:41 pm
It is like they are pulling a Saab — attempting to push the brand where it really, really should not go and alienating their core audience.”
For quite a few years, many of us have been calling Subarus the new Saab. That used to be a good thing. Perhaps Subie’s mistake creates an opportunity for Saab to find itself again.
That nose looks more like a Ford to me. I’m starting to worry about Subaru, especially that our Legacy might be our last with the direction they keep heading. Ugly fat-ass designs.
That nose looks more like a Ford to me. I’m starting to worry about Subaru, especially that our Legacy might be our last with the direction they keep heading. Ugly fat-ass designs.
The Legacy is the last attractive car that they make. The current iteration has an elegance that even the 5-series no longer does.
I’m seriously concerned that the next redesign is going to look like Shamu or even worse, like a large Imprezza.
The current generation Forrester always seemed like a wagon to me, perhaps competing internally with the Outback. I’ve driven a Forrester several times and while it’s no sports coupe, it handles with much more spirit than any CUV I’ve ever driven. When I was doing research on buying my Wrangler in 06, many sites said I should also consider a Forrester. Nope, it’s no Jeep, no SUV, just a good AWD wagon. The new one looks like what Subaru should be trying to avoid.
As Americans get bigger and bigger, it really leaves very little options for Subaru and other car makers. We do need to remind ourselves that the main goal of business is money…not some unique stance that only 5% of the market is going to appreciate and actually pay for.
Also note how other cars have lost significant gas mileage lately as they’ve increased power: Honda Accord V-6, Acura TL, even Mazda 3’s.
What concerns me more with Subaru is the survey I received from them last week asking if I’d still buy a Legacy Spec-B had it only come in automatic. Ack!
P.S. My 2006 Legacy Spec-b is getting 28.8 mpg (which is the lowest I’ve gotten due to slower snow driving) since my last oil change…29.7 in summer weather.
As a fan of the brand, the logic of some of Subaru’s recent decision escapes me. Why did they turn the iconic Forester into yet another generic looking CUV? How hard can it be to source a decent 6 speed automatic transmission? Or a manual transmission that doesn’t feel like an agricultural implement? Why can’t I get a 3.6 liter H6 in a Legacy or Outback? On some models, why is stability control bundled with non-related items such as leather? What is it with those flat, wide unsupportive seats?
It’s a shame – they get so much right and then shoot themselves in the foot with avoidable mistakes.
Recently I tested the Nissan Rogue. Pretty much everything the Subarus are and a couple of grand cheaper. Still waiting for Subaru to uncouple stablility control and leather. With the newer Cute utes coming on line I am afraid Subaru is toast.
Try to find a similar cute ute that has a manual transmission option. Go ahead, I’ll wait. Your precious Rogue only comes with a CVT (gag), and I don’t know of any CUVs released in the last year that let you buy a stick. And once you outfit them with AWD, they cost the same, if not more, than most Subarus.
The only way Subaru can kill this one is to make it automatic only. I’m glad they ditched the boxy tall wagon look and made it more balanced.
“As Americans get bigger and bigger”??? Come on, at some point this has got to quit being an excuse for enlarging cars. If Americans increased in size at the same rate as the cars have the average man would be 350 lbs. now. People (on average) aren’t much fatter than they were 10/20 years ago.
We all get a little larger as we get older and can afford bigger cars. That’s why our parents and grandparents kept moving up in car size/class also. What the automakers keep trying to do is make all cars work for 80% of the market, and losing focus on class of the vehicle. That is why the current Civic is larger/nicer(and more expensive) than the 94-97 Accord. What the Scions/Fit/Yaris are proving is that there will always be 10-20% market for a true “small, affordable car/truck”.
Right now is there is no small truck in the U.S., they have all been “improved” so much that they are larger than the first “midsized” truck. I have seen a few of the original Dakotas lately and they are the same size as a Colorado/Canyon. The first automaker that brings back a true small truck for 10-15K (before discounts) will have a hit.
To Megan
Just went to Edmunds and ran comparison module.
Cheapest Rogue with Stability Control $20570
Cheapest Forester with Stablility Control $27995.
Do I want leather, 230+ hp premium gas engine? No.
This is what I mean by Subaru’s problem for me. I agree that a CVT is less than optimal but I can live with it. Probably no worse than Subaru’s decades old 4 speed. Sticks been there done that. I am a Subaru fan but think thay are missing a large part of the market.
Cheers
It is a sad fact but auto-makers and auto-dealers generally can careless what the “fans” of the brand like so much about their cars.
The Subaru dealer is concerned about all of those potential costumers that walked out of the Subie dealer and made deal in the Local Toyota/ Honda dealer.
Honestly Subarus in there current state do have a great deal of drawbacks to them that amount to NO sale for too many subie dealers today.
Toping the list is that Subarus are about the last of the Japanese cars sold in America that are still design for Japanese demographics. They are small inside with rather limited FRONT leg room.
Subarus all come AWD whether you need it or not. The interior quality is cut below the class leaders. The fuel economy sucks. The base engine is weak. The turbo engine does NOT appeal to mainstream buyers, nor does it work well with the autobox. Who the hell wants a 4pd auto box in a $28,000 car? Outside of the Legeacy their vehicles are UGLY!
With that said the Subie fans need to Chill-out! If Subaru was to continue to cater to this crowd it will be dead in less than ten years.
There is no reason to think they can’t current Subaru fans and expand it’s market more, but I don’t think they are going to do that the way they have been trying. Exactly why does the world need another Camry/Accord clone, Subaru does some nice things very well and they don’t need to water that down to TRY and pick up Camry blandmobile buyers.
I agree the 4-speed auto sucks, but that has to be fixed regardless of who they are targetting. The base engine is pretty nice, way better with more character than Toyota’s, almost on par with Honda’s offerings. Sure it doesn’t get great gas mileage by that is due to the fultime AWD not the engine, just ask the people with the old FWD models. The exteriors have been all over the place lately it makes the company look worse than when it had a quirky but cohesive design theme. The interiors do need some work but not the way these new ones look, cheap and disorganized in thought. A hodgepodge of copied bits and pieces from the likes of Ford/Toyota/Honda/Chrysler makes the company look like Suzuki not Toyota.
They can go after a new market of buyers but if they alienate their original audience in the process they stand to lose a lot of the customers that put them in the place they have been recently, which could be a pretty heavy hit to their profit margin.
Hmmm…that photo makes it look an awful lot like a Highlander.
Too bad as I thought the 2003-07 Forester had a very “balanced” look to it. As far as claims of poor gas mileage, compared to what? The Forester’s numbers are about equal to the Honda CR-V and Toyota RAV-4, its closest competitors.
Funny to hear Subaru characterized as a “niche player.” That may be true in some parts of the country but here in Colorado they are mainstream, big time. You can’t swing a dead cat in this state without hitting two dozen of them.