Run Run Away

Question:

I have a plain  95 Impreza sedan with the 2.2l engine.  The car has been great, but the gas mileage has been poor.  Over the life of the car(11,000 miles) the vehicle has averaged 21 mpg.  I live right in the city and 95% of my driving is stop and go traffic. In really cold weather it has got as low as 18mpg.  During that tank of gas the temp averaged about -10F.  With several starts in the -20F range. I also idle the car a lot in those temps. In pure Highway driving I have never seen better than 25mpg.  At the 9000 mile mark the mileage has improved to around 22 mpg city. That big hood scoop (on the Impreza Sport) will effect Hwy milage I imagine.  

Response:

I just had Q-Lube replace all the running gear oil with GL-5 Synthetic (trany and rear-end) on my 96 Impreza Outback.  Mileage jumped from 23 to 27. FYI

Response:

Re: Off-road capability of the Subaru Legacy Outback I recently purchased a 97 Legacy Outback, and, contrary to what Consumer Reports  says, the Legacy Outback is indeed a capable off-road vehicle. The confusion may have arisen due to the fact that Subaru issues the same owners manual for both the Legacy wagon and the Legacy Outback.  The regular Legacy wagon, probably due to its less powerful engine and lower ground clearance, is not really recommended for off-road use, which is stated in the manual.  I believe this is where Consumer Reports erred. Oh and BTW, I test-drove both a RAV4 and Subaru Legacy Outback, and found that the Subaru gave a much more pleasant ride on normal highway conditions (Sadly, the conditions where I think 98% of sport-utility vehicles are ever used )  I believe I heard that the Legacy outback is outselling the RAV4, though I cannot confirm this. Just my $0.02, Biju – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – To tell you the truth, I don’t know why they even compare themselves with a Cherokee or Explorer, except as marketing hype.  They hype them as off-road capable, but the owners manual (according to Consumer reports) says: "These vehicles . . . are not designed for off-road use, and are unacceptable for driving on rough roads." I’m not saying they are bad vehicles, but jeez, the Outback is only about the size of a Honda Accord and the Outback Sport (Impreza) is more like a Civic in size. What a killing they must be making, take a regular car, put on big tires and fog lamps, call it a "sport utility wagon".  I think the RAV4 is going to wipe the floor with them in that market.

Response:

: I recently purchased a 97 Legacy Outback, and, contrary to what Consumer : Reports  says, the Legacy Outback is indeed a capable off-road vehicle. : The confusion may have arisen due to the fact that Subaru issues the same : owners manual for both the Legacy wagon and the Legacy Outback.  The The manual has been changed for ‘97 – yours should have an offroad section. : vehicles are ever used )  I believe I heard that the Legacy outback is : outselling the RAV4, though I cannot confirm this. The RAV is outselling the Outback in terms of numbers, because Toyota is a much bigger company with a much bigger sales entwork.  They usually sell about 10 times the cars that Subaru sells.  However, in terms of percentates, the Outback makes up about 1/3 of total Subaru sales.  The RAV4 is about 1%.  There are about 3300 Outbacks sold per month, and a peak of about 7k RAVs at the end of last year. — |  Rich Rubel        |  Happiness is an AWD Subaru!                      |   |                    |     http://alumni.umbc.edu/~rrubel1/outback.html  |

Response:

says… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Where do people get the idea that the Outback is not a capable off-road use vehicle?  Yes, it is not the vehicle to drive on the Rubicon with and it cannot take VERY HEAVY off road use.  It is not intended for it. It is absolutely capable of off road use to the same degree that most SUV owners use the off road capabilities of their vehicles.  It is intended for light to moderate off road duty while maintaining a comfortable ride on the road.  It is intended to fill the void in the auto market where a normal sedan or wagon stops, and an SUV’s start.  The majority of the people who buy SUV’s never need the true off road or no-road capability of the vehicle, they buy it for the safety and the all-weather capability.  Many of them never see more "off road" than going to the ski lodge.  Subaru sells cars to its longtime loyal customers, and to people who are realizing that they want a more comfortable riding, lower cost, vehicles that provide the same all weather capabilty of an SUV.  The Subaru Outback series is that niche.  I bought my Outback Sport because it has great handling, a good ride, and AWD.  It is great on snow, wet pavement, and dirt roads, and has enough ride height for most applications people will need it for.  The Legacy Outback has more ground clearance than the Explorer, and the Outback Sport has better ride and handling than the RAV4.

I think the interesting thing about the Outback (especially the Legacy Outback) is that it has considerably more off-road capability than it looks like it has.  I think it might have surprised even Subaru engineers who created what they might have initially thought was kind of a gimmick (raise up a regular Legacy sedan, put on heavy shocks, bigger tires, etc.)   If they’d known how capable the Outback really was they probably would have done this a few years ago and capitalized on the beginning of the SUV craze instead of just the middle of it. Even more interesting is the fact that in those 99% of SUV applications (i.e., driving to the ski lodge, driving on the occasional dirt road) the Outback actually outperforms the typical SUV (due to lower ride height).   It’s not just "almost" an SUV—it’s better than an SUV in those light-duty situations (i.e., it is superior to an SUV both on pavement and on dirt roads).  It only starts to lose out to the SUV in REALLY heavy-duty off-road situations—and even then, it can usually get through (albeit with more difficulty than an SUV).  You can even ford a shallow stream with it (this is approved in the manual!)  I wouldn’t, however, try to cross a river with the thing (a la Dante’s Peak).  Though I wonder how it might do with an exhaust snorkel . . . As for just dressing up a sedan and calling it a SUV (Actually Subaru calls them Sport Utility Wagons) what do you think alot of the new SUVs are?  Honda CRV is Accord based and I think the RAV4 is based on the Camry or Corolla (I could be wrong).

The Honda CR-V is actually Civic-based, believe it or not.  The RAV4 is car-based also (though I don’t know which car). – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Yes they look like a truck but in assessing of road capability and durability, what does the body of the car have to do with it?  Isn’t it the mechanical parts that are the most important?   All the Subaru’s needed was an adjustment in ground clearance and an increase in tire size.  They already were AWD, durable vehicles. (Alright, the old ones rusted out, but they still started after the body had fallen off) Subaru sells to a niche market.  They need to entice people into their niche market so they grab the fringe of the SUV people who want an AWD vehicle that they can go skiing, camping, fishing etc.. with and yet is a comfortable way to drive to work everyday rain or shine or snow.  This will probably solicit many responses from people who feel that their SUV’s ride great and feel fine, but they do not ride like a car, and this is what many of the people who buy the Outbacks are looking for. The Outbacks also have the advantage of a certain unique-ness.  Nobody else builds anything like them. Just a few thoughts, Ogden Sawyer ‘97 Subaru Outback Sport

Response:

The only features of the Outback that the ‘car’ wagon LSi doesn’t have are:

There are also options that are only available on the Outback.  Among these are:         Cold Weather Package         Trailer Towing Package         Extra 12 Volt outlets (2 Standard + 1 Optional)         Weatherband Radio (Standard in Limited) It isn’t really a feature, but there is also the two-tone paint.  This of course could be a plus or a minus, depending on how you feel it looks.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -To tell you the truth, I don’t know why they even compare themselves with a Cherokee or Explorer, except as marketing hype.  They hype them as off-road capable, but the owners manual (according to Consumer reports) says: "These vehicles . . . are not designed for off-road use, and are unacceptable for driving on rough roads." I’m not saying they are bad vehicles, but jeez, the Outback is only about the size of a Honda Accord and the Outback Sport (Impreza) is more like a Civic in size. What a killing they must be making, take a regular car, put on big tires and fog lamps, call it a "sport utility wagon".  I think the RAV4 is going to wipe the floor with them in that market.

I haven’t driven the RAV4, but the engine is quite small.  Admittedly, so is the vehicle.  The Outback did say that in the owners manual in the 1996 version of the manual.  However, an addendum was sent to owners that indicated that it was designed for off-road use.  The suspension is what makes it a so called "sport utility wagon".  I agree with you, it doesn’t compare to a truck, ie. Cherokee or Explorer.  The reason it doesn’t compare is the suspension in the trucks is far stiffer and better suited to offroad use.  I have owned pickups, a regular Legacy, and an Outback.  I would put the Outback between the Legacy and a true sport ute in function.  It just so happens that is exactly what I wanted.  I traded in my regular Legacy as soon as the Outback was widely available. Good drivin’!

Response:

Where do people get the idea that the Outback is not a capable off-road use vehicle?  Yes, it is not the vehicle to drive on the Rubicon with and it cannot take VERY HEAVY off road use.  It is not intended for it. It is absolutely capable of off road use to the same degree that most SUV owners use the off road capabilities of their vehicles.  It is intended for light to moderate off road duty while maintaining a comfortable ride on the road.  It is intended to fill the void in the auto market where a normal sedan or wagon stops, and an SUV’s start.  The majority of the people who buy SUV’s never need the true off road or no-road capability of the vehicle, they buy it for the safety and the all-weather capability.  Many of them never see more "off road" than going to the ski lodge.  Subaru sells cars to its longtime loyal customers, and to people who are realizing that they want a more comfortable riding, lower cost, vehicles that provide the same all weather capabilty of an SUV.  The Subaru Outback series is that niche.  I bought my Outback Sport because it has great handling, a good ride, and AWD.  It is great on snow, wet pavement, and dirt roads, and has enough ride height for most applications people will need it for.  The Legacy Outback has more ground clearance than the Explorer, and the Outback Sport has better ride and handling than the RAV4. As for just dressing up a sedan and calling it a SUV (Actually Subaru calls them Sport Utility Wagons) what do you think alot of the new SUVs are?  Honda CRV is Accord based and I think the RAV4 is based on the Camry or Corolla (I could be wrong).  Yes they look like a truck but in assessing of road capability and durability, what does the body of the car have to do with it?  Isn’t it the mechanical parts that are the most important?   All the Subaru’s needed was an adjustment in ground clearance and an increase in tire size.  They already were AWD, durable vehicles. (Alright, the old ones rusted out, but they still started after the body had fallen off) Subaru sells to a niche market.  They need to entice people into their niche market so they grab the fringe of the SUV people who want an AWD vehicle that they can go skiing, camping, fishing etc.. with and yet is a comfortable way to drive to work everyday rain or shine or snow.  This will probably solicit many responses from people who feel that their SUV’s ride great and feel fine, but they do not ride like a car, and this is what many of the people who buy the Outbacks are looking for. The Outbacks also have the advantage of a certain unique-ness.  Nobody else builds anything like them. Just a few thoughts, Ogden Sawyer ‘97 Subaru Outback Sport

Response:

: The only features of the Outback that the ‘car’ wagon LSi doesn’t have : are: : HD suspension : the big tires : fog lamps (but they are optional on LSi) : roofline is about 2" higher on Outback Uh, there IS no Impreza LSi.  That designation is unique to the Legacy line.  The originator of this thread has an Outback Sport, which is the Impreza-based Outback. Now – if you want differences between the Legacy LSi and Legacy Outback, you’ll need to go farther than Kelly Blue Book since they never list everything. Among other things left out, the Outback fog lights are unique to that model, the grill/bumpers are unique, the paint is different, there’s a second power outlet in the rear, there are extra protector plates over doorsills and rear bumper, a rear cargo area rubber mat is standard, the car sits quite a bit higher than the LSi, the interior colors are different (cloth seat pattern unique to Outback).  There’s more, but I don’t feel like listing it all. I’m not as up on the Outback Sport, so I can’t point out any differences other than the second power outlet and paint/bumpers. — |  Rich Rubel        |  Happiness is an AWD Subaru!                      |   |                    |     http://alumni.umbc.edu/~rrubel1/outback.html  |

Response:

The only features of the Outback that the ‘car’ wagon LSi doesn’t have are: HD suspension the big tires fog lamps (but they are optional on LSi) roofline is about 2" higher on Outback That’s it, according to Kelley Blue Book web page.

Response:

Actually the fog lamps are optional,  I have only seen one car with them yet.  It was on the dealer’s lot next to mine.    There is also the special paint scheme, the ABS, the outback has kickplates over the rear bumper in front of the liftgate and on all the door sills. It also has an "auxilliary 12 volt outlet in the "cargo area".  I don’t really know about the LSi version of the wagon so I can’t tell you wether all these are standard or not, I just know that they are what was pointed out to me as what are standard on the Outback Sport that are not standard on the normal Impreza.  Most importantly of all, the Rally style hood, with the scoop and the vents is not available on the normal wagon (I am assuming that you are asking about Subarus in the US also because Subaru is VERY different in other countries).  If you want a peppy cargo hauler than go for the normal wagon, but I just like the looks of the Outback.  More character.

The ABS is standard on the L, Lsi, GT, and Outback versions of the Legacy.  The kickplates are options on the wagons (L, Lsi, and GT, not sure about Brighton).  The scoop in the hood are on the GT as well as the Outback.

Response:

: There are also options that are only available on the Outback.  Among : these are: :       Cold Weather Package :       Trailer Towing Package :       Extra 12 Volt outlets (2 Standard + 1 Optional) :       Weatherband Radio (Standard in Limited) Parts of the cold-weather package are available for all models… I did forget the trailer package, as well as the skid plates… — |  Rich Rubel        |  Happiness is an AWD Subaru!                      |   |                    |     http://alumni.umbc.edu/~rrubel1/outback.html  |

Response:

: The ABS is standard on the L, Lsi, GT, and Outback versions of the : Legacy.  The kickplates are options on the wagons (L, Lsi, and GT, not : sure about Brighton).  The scoop in the hood are on the GT as well as : the Outback. You’re doing it again – you’re confusing the Legacy Outback with the Outback Sport (Impreza version) which is what the original poster has. Your comments are invalid for the Sport model. — |  Rich Rubel        |  Happiness is an AWD Subaru!                      |   |                    |     http://alumni.umbc.edu/~rrubel1/outback.html  |

Response:

snip… Among other things left out, the Outback fog lights are unique to that model, the grill/bumpers are unique, the paint is different, there’s a second power outlet in the rear, there are extra protector plates over doorsills and rear bumper, a rear cargo area rubber mat is standard, the car sits quite a bit higher than the LSi, the interior colors are different (cloth seat pattern unique to Outback).  There’s more, but I don’t feel like listing it all. I’m not as up on the Outback Sport, so I can’t point out any differences other than the second power outlet and paint/bumpers. — snip…

The differences between the Outback Sport and Impreza wagon are much the same as above. For both cars, the suspension is beefier all around. JDF

Response:

Sorry, I thought we were talking about the Outback Sport which, in the US, is the Impreza.  The Legacy/Liberty Outback may have these options available as stated before, I don’t know because I did not look at the car.  In the US ABS on the Impreza is only available in the Outback Sport.  This is a change for ‘97.  A step backwards if you ask me, but a change. The kickplates, etc.. are all optional on the other versions of the Impreza here, but are standard on the Outback Sport.  The hood scoop and hood vents are only available on the Outback Sport in the Impreza model line, thought the Legacy Outback and the Legacy GT both have hood scoops as well. Sorry for the confusion, Ogden Sawyer ‘97 Subaru Outback Sport

Response:

Actually the fog lamps are optional,  I have only seen one car with them yet.  It was on the dealer’s lot next to mine.    There is also the special paint scheme, the ABS, the outback has kickplates over the rear bumper in front of the liftgate and on all the door sills. It also has an "auxilliary 12 volt outlet in the "cargo area".  I don’t really know about the LSi version of the wagon so I can’t tell you wether all these are standard or not, I just know that they are what was pointed out to me as what are standard on the Outback Sport that are not standard on the normal Impreza.  Most importantly of all, the Rally style hood, with the scoop and the vents is not available on the normal wagon (I am assuming that you are asking about Subarus in the US also because Subaru is VERY different in other countries).  If you want a peppy cargo hauler than go for the normal wagon, but I just like the looks of the Outback.  More character. ORSawyer Ogden Sawyer ‘97 Subaru Outback Sport

Response:

says… To tell you the truth, I don’t know why they even compare themselves with a Cherokee or Explorer, except as marketing hype.  They hype them as off-road capable, but the owners manual (according to Consumer reports) says: "These vehicles . . . are not designed for off-road use, and are unacceptable for driving on rough roads."

As olc pointed out, this was a mistake in the 1996 manual, which has since been corrected. The ‘96 and ‘97 Outbacks are off-road capable, and in fact are superior to most SUVs on most dirt roads (particularly cornering as has often been mentioned) due to the AWD and lower center of gravity.  They aren’t quite up to SUV standards for really heavy off-road use (no low range, suspension is a little less heavy than a typical SUV) but they can get through pretty nasty off-road situations when needed, I’ve done it, and the car works. I’m not saying they are bad vehicles, but jeez, the Outback is only about the size of a Honda Accord and the Outback Sport (Impreza) is more like a Civic in size.

The full-sized Outback has 74 cubic feet of cargo space, way more than a RAV4 (57.9), Sidekick (45), Sportage (55.4), and even more than a Jeep Cherokee SE (71.8) (and that’s with the seats down—it blows away these cars even more with the seats up).  It matches a Chevy Blazer.  It’s only maybe 6-8 cubic feet less than an Explorer, Jeep Grand Cherokee, or a 4Runner. Mitsu

Response:

: Have the car about 2 weeks, with auto transmission, 500 miles on the : speedo and getting approx 20 mpg combination city and highway. : What can I expect? : Thanks : Ben My _Legacy_ Outback has been pretty consistently getting 21-22 mpg in mixed city/hwy. I’ve seen a low of 18 on one tank, and a high of 28 a couple of times for almost exclusively highway driving. Many of these miles have been with a big ski rack on top. It seems that this costs me a mile or two per gallon – I need to experiment more with this and see if it’s true. I’m hoping as the car continues to break in (2,900 mi now), the mileage will improve slightly. Your mileage seems a little low, as the Outback Sport is rated at 23/30, compared to the Outback’s 21/27. -Darrin Sharp (sharp at fc dot hp dot com <- spam protection)

Response:

To tell you the truth, I don’t know why they even compare themselves with a Cherokee or Explorer, except as marketing hype.  They hype them as off-road capable, but the owners manual (according to Consumer reports) says: "These vehicles . . . are not designed for off-road use, and are unacceptable for driving on rough roads."

This was an error in the manual, which was copied over from the 1995 manual. There is a supplement for 1996 and 1997 which remedies thsi. I’m not saying they are bad vehicles, but jeez, the Outback is only about the size of a Honda Accord and the Outback Sport (Impreza) is more like a Civic in size.

The Legacy Outback is smaller than an Accord but has more cargo space than a Cherokee (or the Accord). The Impreza has a lot more space than a RAV4, which drives fine in a straight line, but corners like it was on stilts. The RAV4 is basically for the "cool" look of an SUV. In today’s marker, you can buy a Legacy Outback for less than a RAV4. And the Subarus meet passenger car safety standards which most SUVs do not. The RAV4 mailing list people report that very slight front impacts take out the bumper, grill, and radiator. What a killing they must be making, take a regular car, put on big tires and fog lamps, call it a "sport utility wagon".  I think the RAV4 is going to wipe the floor with them in that market.

And I think you haven’t done your homework. There’s more difference between the out back and the "car" legacys than that.

Response:

To tell you the truth, I don’t know why they even compare themselves with a Cherokee or Explorer, except as marketing hype.  They hype them as off-road capable, but the owners manual (according to Consumer reports) says: "These vehicles . . . are not designed for off-road use, and are unacceptable for driving on rough roads." I’m not saying they are bad vehicles, but jeez, the Outback is only about the size of a Honda Accord and the Outback Sport (Impreza) is more like a Civic in size. What a killing they must be making, take a regular car, put on big tires and fog lamps, call it a "sport utility wagon".  I think the RAV4 is going to wipe the floor with them in that market.

Response:

I hope you get better than 20 mixed driving.  My Jeep GC Laredo, with just me, gets 2021 highway/city.  You have to get at least 5K before milage improves. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Have the car about 2 weeks, with auto transmission, 500 miles on the speedo and getting approx 20 mpg combination city and highway. What can I expect? Thanks Ben    Erm, that doesnt sound right…    Subaru is always saying they get much better milage than a cherokee, and my cherokee gets 24-25 MPG….

Response:

Have the car about 2 weeks, with auto transmission, 500 miles on the speedo and getting approx 20 mpg combination city and highway. What can I expect? Thanks Ben

Response:

Have the car about 2 weeks, with auto transmission, 500 miles on the speedo and getting approx 20 mpg combination city and highway. What can I expect? Thanks Ben

    Erm, that doesnt sound right…     Subaru is always saying they get much better milage than a cherokee, and my cherokee gets 24-25 MPG….

Response:

My ‘97 Outback Sport has 1200 miles on it and has the average of 22 mpg city+hwy. One time it reached 25 mpg on mostly highway. Hope it can get better after a few thousands miles. Note, most of time I have three persons on the car when driving. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Have the car about 2 weeks, with auto transmission, 500 miles on the speedo and getting approx 20 mpg combination city and highway. What can I expect? Thanks Ben     Erm, that doesnt sound right…     Subaru is always saying they get much better milage than a cherokee, and my cherokee gets 24-25 MPG….

Response:

:     Subaru is always saying they get much better milage than a : cherokee, and my cherokee gets 24-25 MPG…. Does your Cherokee stay in 2WD most of the time?  Makes a difference… My Legacy gets 21 mixed, 25-27 hwy.  The Impreza should do better.  IIRC, it’s rated 23/30, so I’d expect 25 avg after it’s broken in (give it at least 4-5k miles). — |  Rich Rubel        |  Happiness is an AWD Subaru!                      |   |                    |     http://alumni.umbc.edu/~rrubel1/outback.html  |

Response: