Subaru wasn’t the only automaker who bucked the misery in 2009, but it was one of the most consistent sales performers month after month. As a longtime Subaru aficionado, my initial diagnosis was that Subaru moved upmarket just as its brand equity was peaking. The brand’s new, flashier interiors, along with upsized redesigns of the Forester and Outback may not have been my cup of 30-weight, but they put the brand on more shopping lists among the automotive mainstream. That’s at least part of the message of Automotive News [sub]’s dissection of Subaru’s strong year, as Subie insiders reveal that more tech toys, better rear legroom and more “sophistication” were important in making Subaru products live up to the inherent “premium-ness” of their AWD platforms.
But, they say, the opposite was also true. Subaru had intended to push the brand even farther upmarket by loading its new Legacy/Outback with luxury frills, and even contemplating a true luxury car. Subaru dealers, according to AN [sub], were at least partially responsible for pushing the brand away from luxury and towards value. “It was one of the best-kept secrets for 20 years — ever since they went to their platform of all-wheel-drive cars,” explains one dealer. “Now that it is priced at or lower than a front-wheel-drive car, people understand that this is a hell of a deal.” It seems that to at least some extent, Subaru has become successful by walking an unoccupied line between capability, value and premiumness, proving in the process that niche brands can survive in America.
How do you explain Subaru’s success?
Two things:
1. Subaru is at the top of its product cycle — the Impreza/WRX and Forester are only 1.5 years old and the Legacy was just recently introduced.
2. They are in the right place at the right time. For whatever reason, millions of Americans are under the impression that if you live north of Florida or Texas, you need AWD to get through winter. Whatever.
And yes, I drive a FWD Honda with Blizzacs. And have never been stuck in snow and prefer my car rather to the wife’s Audi whenver the weather gets rough.
+1 Yes that seems like a pretty accurate assessment. I would add that given that an AWD Subaru cost about the same as a FWD car of the same size, people feel like their getting more for their money. (Which was one of the main points made above.)
+1
Here is my half-baked theory: SUV/CUV refugees want something more fuel efficient in case gas prices spike again, but they aren’t willing to give up all four wheels being driven.
For a lot of people it seems like FWD or RWD are deal breakers.
Heck I used to drive a 350Z Roadster with blizzaks. That combined with heated seats meant commuting just fine in the snow, as long as it wasn’t too high. (Ground clearance was still an issue, obviously).
ajla and SherbornSean +1 each.
I’d be willing to bet that a lot of SUV/CUV refugees/intenders drove an Eliot wave of Subaru buyers as they saw the Forester and Outbacks as more fuel efficient/WAAAAAYY less costly than ExplorEnvoyBurbScaladeSions…..Audi got a bit of this bounce, too, for us badge snobs (wrote the proud owner of an A6 Quatro Avant) but Subaru got the lion’s share. I have to admit the Outback was/is on my list for the next vehicle purchase…
I don’t know where all the hate for AWD comes from….probably alot of sneers towards 4WD and AWD drivers who still end up in the ditch due to carelessness/cluelessness and a sense of entitlement (as in ‘I’ve got AWD, so let the rest of these goobers drive 10 mph slower than the limit. It’s my God-given right to go warp speed! Damn the sleet! Full-speed ahead!”)
I had driven FWD or RWD all my life (mostly FWD) until I got the Audi, and my wife drives a Montero. Like all tools, both are EXCELLENT when used with intelligence and humility.
Anyway, my congrats to Subaru and their buyers for such a good year. The cars are solid, appear to be reliable, safe and a good value. These are qualities which have always been in vogue for a lot of drivers….just more so in 2009, and going forward, I’d bet.
Honestly, I think that as they push upmarket, they will hit a point where their niche becomes unsustainably small. At one point, their slogan was, “Cheap and ugly does it.” If that was still the case, I’d think they could probably sell more cars.
I previously leased a 2005 base-model Impreza, and it was a good car, but I’m not sure I gained much over it’s competitors (Jetta/Golf, 3, Corolla, Focus, Sentra, Altima, etc.) other than an advantage in traction with crapass/overpriced OEM tires.
I couldn’t tell you; I don’t really like any of the new Subies. The new Impreza is kinda fugly (mainly the hatchback version), I like the older boxy Forester better than this new one, and the new Legacy/Outback is way too huge for my tastes. I remember looking at a brand new Legacy Outback wagon in the showroom and being blown away by how utterly massive it was compared to my ’03 LGT sitting outside on the other side of the glass. But I guess that’s what America wants — enormous, comfortable boats loaded with goodies.
Subaru is one of the few oddball non-comformist car options left. SAAB –> neglected to the point of irrelivance. Volvo –> Same. Peugeot, Citroen, –> long gone form this market. Fortunately Subaru got out from under GM before all their cars were rebadged Buicks and Chevys.
As the article says, more rear legroom. Note to Suzuki: cars sized like the old Legacy tend to fail.
Michael,
Don’t say that! Isn’t the Kizashi like the sportiest budget midsizer out there?
Comments like that are the reason Honda and Mazda went too big in their current iterations of the Accord and 6.
Been reading up on the new Kizashi (although of course TTACs hasn’t reviewed one yet and neither has my old bathroom reader Car and Driver). Sounds like it’s right up my alley (with the manual.)
my sister likes the look of the kizashi for her next company car and a big plus is the fact it’s bigger than a mazda3, but smaller than an accord. i feel the same way, but who’d know how many else do!
@educatordan:
C&D just published their test of the Kizashi. They liked it; lives up to the sportiness promise, decent interior, and since looks are a personal thing, I’ll say I like the looks.
Subaru got my money in 2005 for having built a stolid, unstoppable car in 1993. I wanted the 1993 again but with more power and that is what they offered (2005 Legacy GT wagon, 5MT). Now that there’s no Legacy wagon in the US market I shall have to look elsewhere. Gadgets and conveniences don’t detract from a car but there are plenty of them on the ’05 and having even more of them is not a selling point for me.
How strange. My 93 legacy L had served me well, nothing wrong with it 190k and still pulling, just boring. So in 05/06 when I found out they were discontinuing the manual wagon LGT I bought an 05. it’s caried a twin matress set, a conference room table and a dozen chairs, and all sorts of improbable loads. It’s never boring. But unless they come out with something (or bring something back) I’ll have to look elsewhere when it’s time.
Subaru makes interesting cars. Sure they can be a bit quirky, and they’ll never sell like Camries or Accords, but they offer an intriguing choice. AWD is a huge plus, especially with decent MPG.
I don’t think I’ll ever go back to FWD (or RWD).
They are high quality, and have a core competency with their AWD (Like SherbornSean’s, my Accord is equipped with snows, and I don’t get stuck, but if you have the subie you have much less need for two sets of tires), and they have a certain cachet. My ex has always been very happy with Subies, and wouldn’t drive anything else. They may not be my cup of espresso but I’ve always liked hers.
Agreed. The Subaru owner in the sometimes-snow-sometimes-ice-sometimes-nothing belt of the Mid-South and southern Plains can likely get away with careful driving and all-season tires. It’s better than FWD or RWD but not as good as anything with snow tires. However, Why should I want to have an extra set of tires that I put on the car for the 5-20 days each winter that I might need them and tear them up on dry pavement for the other 55-70 days that I don’t?
Because even with all seasons and awd… you still dont get the traction you’d get with snows.
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/12/29/proper-winter-tires-are-more-important-than-all-wheel-drive/
Because we live in a post-modern world where Jeff Koons’ work sells for tens of millions.
When you’re a solid niche brand, and all the mainstreamers are busy trying to stay in the black– fratboys and soccermoms buy your cars. This same thing happened to VW in 1999. The problem comes in a few years whenever you’re raking-in record profits for a niche maker, but have the expenses and product pipeline of a mainstreamer. We’ve got a decade to wait to know if this news is good or bad.
Yup. My wallet speaks for there well being. New 04 WRX. Traded in for a Sti in 06. Still driving the Sti and loving it here in the great white north. New car starter goes in it tommorow! I plan on keeping it even if I get another car.
Subaru is a small company making a product line which just happens to be a great replacement for many of the things people bought Explorers, Tahoes, Cherokees and Suburbans for. Not everyone coming out of a big BOF SUV can get what they want done with a Subaru, but enough of them can to make Subaru look good.
Even with all of this past year’s growth, Subaru’s US market share is still in the 2% range ( http://media.subaru.com/index.php?s=43&item=127 ). Subaru is enjoying being a small fish in a big pond.
Subaru remains in a very poor strategic position visa-vis the global automotive giants. I expect it to be fully absorbed into Toyota sometime in the next five to fifteen years. Remember when niche brand Porsche was widely proclaimed the World’s Most Profitable Auto Company?
John, I think that your first paragraph nails it! Subaru is a smaller, more efficient Explorer, Tahoe… Handles waaaay better too, which is an additional bonus for the folks coming down from the mid-sized SUVs.
But, I wonder what is the mix of new Outback buyers in terms of Subaru “virginity.” I’ll just bet that the mix may be biased towards Subaru newbies – and that, I’ll bet too, is a change. And if that is the case, has Subaru dissed their loyal base? And where would they go?
Subaru’s YTD US market share is 2.1%, which means it’s larger than BMW or Mercedes, and as large as Volkswagen. You don’t often hear those three described as small fish in a big pond…
BMW, Mercedes and VW are all small fish in the North American pond. They exist only because they are huge fish back in their home markets, and in VW’s case in multiple markets. Subaru is a small player everywhere it plays. That is the difference.
@Durishin –
If Subaru can “dis” their loyal base but still gain market share, I doubt that they’ll care too much. To extend John’s Porsche analogy, didn’t Porsche “dis” their loyal base by making the Cayenne?
I don’t recall much in the way of deep discounting / 0% financing / cheap money / sub-prime credit deals / thousands on the hood promotions from Subaru over the last 10 years.
So maybe, just maybe they earned those customers with a good price, feature, quality balance.
Could it be that doing the right things actually does pay off? Shh… Don’t tell GM :-)
Off the Subaru topic, but right on for the GM (+Chrysler) topic. I remember all those laborious, long analyses about the various reasons GM is in trouble — labor costs, insurance/pension costs, unions, etc.. etc.. — when it all boiled down to what you say: they never did the right thing.
That’s a good general rule: Do the right thing. It’s a shortcut to all good things in life.
I have a 1998 Subaru Legacy GT wagon that is approaching 200k miles. Every time I roll by a FWD vehicle helplessly spinning its wheels in a few inches of snow, I pat my Subaru on the dash and say, “Good job.” Its only limitation is ground clearance; I have to avoid getting high centered.
Every time I roll by a FWD vehicle helplessly spinning its cheap, sub-standard, so-called all-season tires wheels in a few inches of snow, I pat my Subaru on the dash and say, “Good job.”
FIFY.
N.B. Nokians don’t spin.
Don’t get me wrong, Subies are fine vehicles. My next new car may be a WRX, but I’ll have winter/summer sets of tires and wheels.
All true, but set performance aside for a moment, or at least look beyond it.
While Honda is now trying to be all things to all people all at once, Subaru has retained its corporate mojo. Subaru seems to know who it is, what it makes and how to sell it. The fact that it actually listened to the dealers and canceled a luxo-line says worlds about how the company thinks.
Although I’m not a Subie “fan”, I respect them immensely for their bulletproof engines and full-line 4wd at half the cost of the Germans.
Some may see them as a niche player, but the view here is that it’s a helluva big niche.
What we term the “J3” (Toyondassan, Inc.) may soon need to change to the J4.
+1, indeed.
One other thought…
GM sold it’s stake in FHI/Subaru back in 2005 to Toyota. That could have only helped :)
LOL! Good one… most things that GM touched got trashed. RIP Saab.
Simple – they are about the cheapest way into an AWD car, and despite Subaru calling the Outback and the Forester SUVs, folks realize that they are really station wagons and so avoid the SUV stigma that is rampant in the crunchier corners of the country.
Marketers have convinced people they “need” AWD…. My very first car was an ’82 Subaru 4dr. NOT AWD. And if I could get a FWD Subaru they might well be on my shopping list now that Saab is soon to be defunct. But I have absolutely NO use for AWD! And I live in MAINE! AWD just costs more. More to buy, more to fix, more to feed gas to. All for a little extra traction that does not help you stop or steer! The vehicles farthest in the ditch in every snowstorm are SUVs and Subarus – AWD just gives a very false sense of confidence.
I’ll take a 2wd car with snow tires any day. In fact, my real preference is a well-balanced RWD car with a limited slip (or better yet auto-locking) differential and good snow tires.
I will add that based on the experience of MANY Subarus in my extended family and those of friends, any claims of exceptional reliabilty and/or durability of Subarus are complete nonsense. They break. A LOT. And they rust horribly in the North East, even fairly recent ones. And they are VERY expensive to fix. But people love them so they gloss over it.
+1. Pretty much couldn’t have said it any better. Good 2WD, RWD car w/ locking differential and good snow tires will get farther than pretty much any AWD vehicle. Plus the AWD subies get about the same MPG as my SUV- I’ve talked to two of my friends who own WRX’s and we get equal mileage.
You are right sir and wrong. No AWD does NOT help you stop faster (if anything it makes it worse with increased weight) but it will help to steer better.
The out-of-the-closet gay community tends to work in more recession isolated industries.
What bad can you say about a Subaru?
Say you want a really reliable and practical Japanese car. Toyota is boring and there is an increasing suspicious that their reliability as perfect as you’d thought. Honda hasn’t debuted anything interesting lately except the Fit and has recently screwed the pooch with the Crosstour and Insight, so you’re wondering about their quality as well. Nissan isn’t that reliable. Suzuki just feels cheap. So…you step into the Subaru dealership.
And instantly you’re looking at a range of vehicles that really stand out. You have AWD, but don’t seem to be paying any more for it. They’re incredibly safe, so you feel confident that your family will be taken care of in an accident. Plus they not only have green credentials thanks to their PZEV models but also seem more capable of getting you to the nature you profess to care so much about.
Why buy the Camry? Why buy the Accord? Now can pull up in your driveway with something a little different. You don’t pay any more and you get AWD in the bargain. No wonder they’re selling so well.
@Victell — Shame on you.
It’s the right product at the right time with the right features and reliability.
Subaru, to me, is a brand that I trust. It’s an option that isn’t trying too hard to be anything other than an honest product. My experience with a 2005 Subaru Legacy introduced Subaru to my friends and family and now they own them.
I truly belive that FWD will get you around (in snow/ice) only on the planes.
Got to trade my Corolla for 07 STI. What a huge difference!
I do live in Colorado on 9000 ft elevation.
You guys can have your non-awd all you want, just don’t come here.
arm9,
Was that a stability and traction control equipped Corolla with snow tires?
I don’t think anyone is arguing that AWD can help you get going – but on snow and ice packed roads a Corolla with snow tires is going to out stop and out corner an STi with all-seasons any day.
But, it may be a regional thing. Here in Boston people who drive GTI’s and RWD Mercedes, BMW, Lexus often switch to winter tires. Those who drive Subaru, Audi, or an SUV often just keep the all-seasons. You’re going to be much safer in a snow tire equipped S550 or Camry than you are in an A8 or Outback with all-seasons.
Jmo,
it was ordinary 96 Corolla w/good snow tires. I had to use chains on
several occasions just to get through ice on climbing roads. One of them
is on the way to my home. So, winter tires is not a sure answer, chains are (or awd).
I have two sets of weels on my STI, and switch to snow tires in October. I would not
drive on all-seasons in winter, sometimes it’s scary enough even for show tires.
I’m not talking about performance driving – I’m going slow on ice, trying not to end on the tree or in the ditch.
And yes, it could be regional thing – you don’t have mountains (kinda) in Main.
Here in the West Michigan Snowbelt , which ranks just behind Buffalo, Upper Michigan and Colorado for snowfall, an A6 with all seasons has, and continues to do, just find. Sorry to disagree, mate. I drove an Accord with snow tires and my A6 with all-seasons when Michigan dealt up the worst it’s winters could offer. No contest. The A6 gets moving more quickly and with less sideslip, stays straighter, and slows/stops straighter. Overall, it inspires more confidence. Once missed a deer that had wandered onto my two-laner, at 50 mph on 4 inches of hardpack. A quick right/left on the wheel and a tap of the gas pedal was all it took, leaving the dear in one piece and me and the Audi out of the ditch…..doubt I coulda done the same with the Accord, or any other FWD or RWD car….
A good modern stability control equipped FWD or RWD vehicle with top quality snow tires on all four wheels will go anywhere I dare to drive. How have those Swedes managed so well all these years?
Almost every on-line article and presentation I’ve seen about Subaru as of late shows they are listening to their customers and dealers, rather than simply ramming product down the dealer’s throat. The result is what are proving to be popular models that work well as transportation.
Those who insist on RWD have plenty of other choices!
Wow, nothing yet about their marketing?
Subie has a solid lineup and they do have pretty good value, but are they better than Honda or Hyundai? I don’t see it. The one place they are different is in their marketing. Their kindler-gentler treehugger “Love” campaign is the most perfectly timed campaign I’ve seen in decades, and the tone is pitch-perfect, too. At the exact moment that the country is hitting the peak of its revulsion over Bernie Madoff and bankers getting paid millions for wrecking the economy, along comes Subaru with this campaign and a legitimate product image that is as far from looking out for #1 as you can possibly get. I think it’s obvious – Subaru is up 14% this year because people want to identify with the image they are selling – security, value and thinking about people and the world beyond yourself.
I think John Horner nailed it. I mean, there are always lots of reasons for something like this, but his explanation could easily be more important than the rest put together.
Gotta agree. Horner nailed it.
Why is Subaru succeeding? They’re the right size.
Not the cars, the company is the right size. There are few enough layers that the top brass can hear what the dealers and customers are actually saying; they are agile enough to make the necessary course alterations (no luxo line); they don’t have to try to be all things to all people.
Remember the “too big to fail” mantra about the Goldman Sachs and GMs of the world? I’m starting to think that a company that reaches the too-big-to-fail size has also reached the too-big-to-succeed size. At which point the too-bigs have to get bailed out by society.
Have we found the limits of pure capitalism? I think we have.
+1
Even without overt bailouts, overly large companies invariably get themselves supported through the public purse. Therefore, their success no longer depends on their service to the customer. No exceptions.
Walmart – Medicaid and food stamps for employees, siting incentives
McDonalds – Agricultural commodity subsidies, Medicaid and food stamps for employees
Aerospace companies – cost plus defense contracts
Ford – DoE loans, plant location incentives, Government fleets (with premium prices for hybrids)
Along with the housing bubble and subsequent financial catastrophe, the recent SUV craze will go down as one of the greatest ripoffs in history. The snow tire fans have nailed it. 99.99 percent of people who buy SUVs or AWD for only their perceived benefits in driving in snow would find a FWD or RWD car with good snow tires far superior. Better gas mileage, much better steering and handling and braking in snow and ice than an AWD shod with all seasons. The deep-snow argument is also fallacious. In much over a foot of snow, even a Jeep Wrangler Rubicon, without the tires being deflated to 7 psi, is marginal.
I learned a hard lesson last year with gas hogging SUVs and replaced them with FWD shod with Michelins new Ice X2s. What a revelation! SUVs with stability control, traction control, electronic lockers yada yada yada ….. aren’t even CLOSE.
That this isn’t better known fact is a scandal equivalent of people being suckered into buying a house at a wildly-inflated price that grossly exceeds the cost of renting a similar house. Remember: housing prices never fall.
Because people like those quirky AWD vehicles. Even my mom, who is a hardened BMW fanatic, almost got a Subaru Forester!! Subaru is Japanese – yet it is perceived as kind of strange or different (thus making it fresh). Add a pretty good dealer experience and a great ad campaign …
Congrats, Subaru!
How many of you bought or know someone who bought a Subaru because they had bad credit and/or couldn’t come up with any money down?
GM dealers were full of these folks.. They had no other place to go.. Zero Down! No payments for 3 months! 5000 cash back to buy Christmas presents! 0%! Upside down $10K? Roll it in!!
These folks got kicked out of the new car market in the last 18 months…. What percent of Subaru buyers got knocked because these deals died? I’m thinking near zero…
Subaru has a good price/feature/quality mixture and for any clients that they lost due to the recession, they seem to have gained new customers.
They tend to have an educated customer base that’s less likely to be unemployed, they have great marketing tie-ins with organizations like IMBA (International Mountain Bike Association), which gets you a substantial discount, they offer all the capabilities of the SUVs people are dumping in a good-handling, more efficient package, offer one of the best performance bargains out there, and have a very fresh lineup, all cars having been redesigned in the last year or two.
The reason this car company with a vaccum cleaner name and oddly styled cars had a great 2009 is because their buyers didn’t lose their houses, credit lines, or jobs. Subaru attracts a buyer with a more conservative fiscal portfolio. Their product cycle was ready for replacement cars, and the cars they built over the past thirty years have served their customers well.
Subaru buyers tend to be more frugal and more economical with their resources. Always have been this way. So, as the other brands saw their market share drop because they depend upon a more diverse buyer base, Subaru’s held steady.
Now. What do today’s Subaru offer their customers to entice them to return? A lot of old-time Subaru owners aren’t all that into the new Subarus. So it is quite possible that future Subaru sales will remain about where they are now, and may even slightly drop, as they had dropped in the past after good years.
Subaru had good timing. Just as Rambler, VW and Studebaker had good timing in 1957 and 1958 while DeSoto, Hudson, Toyopet, Nash, Renault, Continental and Edsel sales tanked into oblivion and Buick, Lincoln, and Mercury held onto dear life to be revived a few years later.
I think you nailed it. We fit that demographic exactly. Still have our jobs and the old high mileage ’03 Matrix AWD was ready to retire. Our ’10 Forester has the looks, size, features and utility that we wanted and needed, living on a small farm and driving 80+ miles a day to work and back. We’ve found AWD very handy in mud and snow, in fact all our vehicles are AWD or 4WD (also have a ’94 Ranger XLT and an ’00 Expedition Eddie Bauer). We can drive out into the pasture to jump start a tractor, throw a bunch of bags of feed and supplies in with the back seats down, fold them up and go with another couple to dinner and get more than the rated gas mileage on the highway (averaging 28-29 vs. the 26 EPA rating). So far this first Subie has us very pleased with it.
I’m on my third Subaru, following five Audis and a VW. Guess which cars are more reliable ..
Can’t speak for anyone else, but I bought them for interesting engineering and AWD.
My first AWD was an ’88 Audi 4000 quattro. No more FWD for me, thanks. I equate the usual droning about FWD being just as good as AWD in snow along with the “I’d buy the XXX if it came in a wagon, with a six speed manual, a diesel engine, and a price less than $15,000” daydream wishlists I read here so often.
I live in Nova Scotia: we get a lot of snow and a lot of ice. Subarus will go up my driveway out in the country on ice, where you cannot stand up and walk. FWD, bah, used to have to take a dangerous run at it with the front end slewing all over the place with trees just a couple feet away. Of course I use snowtires, I want to stop.
The latest Subarus are much lighter on the solid AWD engineering. Gone are LSDs at the rear, replaced with electronic slip control. Meh. Giantism has followed. People seem to like them, though. Around here, they get them because of AWD, and because “My cousin Bernie had one and it was great”. Reps buy them to get around. But most people buy snowtires too. In Quebec, it’s the law.
Fuji Heavy Industries may have sold a lot of Subarus in the US last year, but are in not great financial shape, so the extra sales helped avert further problems. They paid no dividend on their stock. Google FHI Japan. The president says investment will continue in the new engine plant. No more details, but may be interesting for the future.
I agree with those who say that Subaru is not over-hyped. What you see is what you get, and they generally work very well. Workmanship is adequate, but not outstanding. My LGT is fun. I like it a lot.
Don’t lament the passing of the rear LSD, other than STI grade hardware, it was always a very tame little viscous unit. Even then most of its function was to make it easier and more fun to do donuts in the snow.
As far as getting up icy hills, the VDC that has replaced the rear LSD will serve better, it can brake and transfer power from all of the wheels.
SOMEONE had to rule 2009, for God’s sake…
It’s amazing to see here how much overconfidence AWD imparts to drivers. Do you people really think it makes that much different? Are you really that easily sucked in by a marketing gimick?
It DOES make that much difference…especially in an AWD vehicle with a center of gravity that is somewhat lower than your average Ford Explorer.
That noted, however, people very frequently forget that GOING is only 1/3 the battle in the snow – stopping and turning are kind of important too. I remember a friend whom I had convinced to buy an Outback telling me that she was blown away by how well it went, but had to temper her right foot with the need to occasionally stop.
Tough – in snow – to beat a good set of snow tires on all four corners – regardless which of those corners are driven.
Oh! And I am on Subaru #5 (LGT Spec. B) and wondering why the hell I sold the second SVX.
Marketing, shmarketing. Awd is a real deal. I have seen enough fwd cars not
been able to continue on I70 (in havy snow) to Eisenhower tunnel. Enough cars
not been able to climb hill on the 93 just to the south of Boulder.
As for overconfidence, it will leave you in the ditch no matter what you drive.
It makes a huge difference. I have many years of experience with it and without. I’ll take it, even with a higher vehicle price and lower gas mileage (and smaller gas tank that was in the Matrix AWD we had!).
Why does everybody insist on comparing FWD with snow tires to AWD with all-seasons?
It’s not an either-or decision. Unless it’s become illegal to run snows on an AWD vehicle.
Like wmba, I’m in Nova Scotia, live outside the city, and I’m at the top of a large hill. I’ve run FWD with snow tires all my life, and always thought it was “fine.” This year, I picked up an AWD Impreza with snow tires on it for a winter beater. I’ll never go back.
Climbing the hill last winter in a FWD car was an exercise in careful use of momentum. The Scooby? Just point it and go. It really is better.
They’ve won me over for my future daily-driver uses. (Although, I’m predisposed to eccentric vehicles with the Scooby serving as the winter beater for the garage full of RX cars and the Mazdaspeed.) Even my commuter appliance needs to be interesting. Life it too short to drive boring cars.
Sure AWD is better in snow ect. but do 99% of the people who have it really need it? No! All it is good for is robbing fuel economy. I live in a snow belt region and would never bother with it. For the 2-3 days every winter that the roads are bad I’ll put up with FWD or RWD.
A few points:
If you live on top of a mountain in Colorado, then certainly AWD can be well worth the extra cost. Congratulations, you are in the <1% of people who might actually need it! Personally, if I were living in that environment I would not want a Subaru – I would want a proper 4wd truck with lots of ground clearnance and three locking differentials. Land Rover or MB Gelandwagen, preferably. Frankly, if having or not having awd is the difference between getting where you are going and dying, you should not be on the road anyway. Stay home with a hot toddy next to the fire.
Nobody living in the suburbs of a Northeastern city NEEDS awd. They are paying a pretty steep premium in upfront cost, maintenance, and especially gas for the 3-4 days a year that it makes it easier to get through the plow drift at the end of thier driveway.
Around here (Maine), awd vs. snow tires is VERY much an either/or situration. No one I know with a Subaru puts snow tires on it. They are all idiots. yes, I am well aware that awd with snow tires is the bee’s knees in snow. At least for going in a straight line. But around here, it is a complete and total waste of money. We have snow plows. Lots, and lots of snow plows. They start plowing before there is enough snow to even bother to plow most storms. And even here in Maine, we get what, MAYBE 5 days a year where the roads are bad enough that AWD will make any difference at all? The other 360 days a year you are still paying for it.
krhodes1,
having your weather pattern, you are probably correct.
And I can agree on a value of having locking differentials. My STI has 3 of them,
my Forester has none. STI is much more unstoppable, I did once get stuck
in Forester with diagonal wheels spinng (in ~1.5 – 2 ft snow, 12% up slope ).
As for not driving in inclement weather, in Colorado it can change fast from sun
to whiteout, no way to predict it.
Subarus also give the driver the image of being an outdoorsy person (like an SUV, but without the negative stigma). At least, that’s why I think people buy Subarus here in California.
Down here in middle Georgia, they haven’t had much popularity since they switched completely to AWD; those who like to go off-road (intentionally) tend to favor 4WD, while others tend to worry more about gas mileage than a day or two (tops) of snow per year.
I had a 1990 Legacy Station Wagon (FWD) and thought it was quite classy, especially compared with the ’83 Tercel Hatchback I was driving; I mean, it had an AUX jack to plug in an Ipod, ten years before Steve Jobs thought of creating one.
Then the interior trim started failing and falling, and I found myself replacing the CV boot every couple of years, and then I realized that “classiness” wasn’t everything.
But it is simple why Subaru is still selling cars: there are those who need AWD, many of whom write reviews in “Consumer Reports,” and Subaru has pretty much cornered the market for family-oriented cars.
Yeah, I am going to go down and buy a Subaru just in case I need to pull out an 18 wheeler. That video is a hoax unless you understand the reality of what occurred there. That semi probably spun its tires until the snow underneath its tires iced up. It really only needed a very tiny nudge to get going again. With a polyester toe strap, any car that could get going enough to give it that tiny nudge could have gotten that semi going under its own power, by stretching out that rubber band. That subaru, most emphatically, was NOT pulling that semi like it appears.
We had three feet of snow fall in one day last year. Yeah, you don’t get stuck with locking differentials, 4×4, traction control, stability control etc. etc. in weather like that. And you don’t get stuck with a two wheel drive minivan with studded snow tires either. What made the body and fender shops delirious with joy was when the snow turned to ice. People still had no trouble getting STARTED. It was stopping and staying on the road, where stability control is FAR more important that AWD.
Yeah, AWD with snow tires is superior to FWD with snow tires. But I would guess that less than 1 percent of of AWD cars and 4×4 trucks and SUVS are shod with appropriate snow tires. Why? Because people think, with the helpless assistance of SUV marketing, that with AWD you don’t need them. It is the big lie.
People with FWD buy snow tires because they have to. People with AWD also have to buy snow tires, but think they don’t.
I’ll be happy to challenge anyone who thinks a RWD car with a limited slip diff and some snows can match my A6 Quattro on snow and ice. With torsen Quattro there’s no need to waste money on snow tires, or put up with the annoying thrumming they make at highway speeds and the shitty dry handling. My Pole Positions are on year round, and I’ve never felt the need to bother with snows even in the absolute worst conditions. Steep driveway? No problemo.
The 2WD whiners were the only ones talking out of their butts until you showed up.
You don’t even need Torsens to get going in snow even the lousyest AWD will do. Oh but then there is stopping and turning which the precious Torsens won’t help you with. If you used a performance winter tire, you would find that they actually beat all-seasons on pavement as well as snow and ice. (http://www.insideline.com/features/tire-test-all-season-vs-snow-vs-summer.html)
Does you challenge include stopping and turning test, AWD doesn’t help there;-)
As a youth I did succeed in getting my Mom’s Torsen center and vacuum locker-rear Quattro Audi stuck in snow, the all-seasons couldn’t handle it, but I did intentionally drive down a crusty unplowed road…
I bought my 05 STi new because it was a good bang/$ at the time (for a new car). I bought snow tires as I would for ANY car. I haven’t gotten stuck yet. I even keep the summer/OEM tires on the original rims & bought rims for the snow tires as well (steel/heavy rims).
Do I need the AWD? Probably not….but it is a fun car irregardless and that is why I bought it.
Sorry but my wife had an Audi with Quattro equipped with M+S tires on it. That’s how the local Audi dealer orders all their cars. It wasn’t as good as my RWD ’81 Olds Cutlass Supreme in snow and ice. And my Cutlass didn’t have limited slip or snow tires on it.
M+S are not snow tires, it is just a rating for all-seasons.
I really have to question “not as good” I can come close to your comparison, I did drive my ’87 Grand National for a short time with snows in the winter, and it had factory LSD option. I had the wastegate cranked down to lowest boost. My Moms 89 Audi 80 Quattro easily had it all over the Buick in the snow, without even locking the rear diff.
It is a matter of simple physics that an AWD car can get going in snow faster and easier than a 2WD on the same tires. The debate is over tire choice, is AWD needed etc. You seem to be in a debate with physics. I salute you for that brave sir.
To illustrate my point I recall getting through the worst of conditions in my buddies 88 Bronco in 4WD. And that thing had NO TREAD on the tires, just ridges of off-roadiness on the egde. no 2WD could have done that on those tires. Yes stopping and turning was frightening…
I am one of those customers, I bought a new WRX this year. Easier to justify AWD when it helps put the power down even in the dry. Subaru engineers their cars to be useful for their customers, not to win comparison tests (see Mazdaspeed3 for that) and the sales seem to be proving that out. I do think turbocharging and the WRX has done a lot for Subarus image, they have more utility and sport going on that any SUV out there.
Subaru walks a fine line with price and value…there are endless discussions about whether the WRX/STI cost too much on the forums. I actually think that they have made two mistakes though that will come back to haunt them:
1.)using a fully hard molded plastic dash in the Impreza. It looks ok but seems chintzy and rattles like crazy.
2.)going for the tall/SUV look with the new Legacy. The last gen looking so good must have been a fluke. They should have stayed with a sleeker car. They already have the tall boy Forrester and the Tribeca SUV.
Maybe abandoning turbo power for the most part in the new Legacy will come back to bite them as well. And damn that lousy paint and horrible stereo system
Sounds like I am complaining, but I am not, the good parts of the Subaru WRX are very good.