Gyroscopic Investing

I'm considering buying either the Outback or Forester?  Looking for a safe, reliable vehicle that can handle lots of snow and weekly trips from central Colorado to Denver.  I haven't owned one previously and know they have a strong, loyal following.  Any pros or cons? 

Yes I own a 2005 Outback. I bought it after copious research and am very satisfied. IMO Subarus are great cars, very safe and reliable, handle well, high quality but not ostentatious, committed to the 5-door layout, best AWD implementation in the world, manage to have some personality, and in particular are ruggedly overbuilt and well made. Honda, Toyota, Nissan, and recently Ford also make reliable high quality cars, but they seem designed and built to be capable but no more. Subarus feel like everything is 110% of what's strictly necessary, so it would be no problem to do something "extreme" like drive through a river or across a desert. The same kind of feeling you get from a 4x4 pickup or Jeep, except those aren't so good in the reliability or fuel economy departments.

The downside of that 110% overbuild is that everything is heavier and more expensive than it could be. Fuel economy is worse than comparable Honda/etc. FWD models (though AFAIK better than any competitive AWD model). Parts seem more expensive than mass-market brands, though less than European luxury brands (limited experience here due to not needing to buy many parts  ). So a Honda/etc. is probably more economical if you have no need or interest in this over-capability. Also they are uncommon so finding a specific configuration can be difficult.

I've always thought that the PP was the Subaru of the investing world.

my first vehicle was a 1982 Subaru 4x4 station wagon, it was a great car.  i ran it up to just under 200,000.00 before selling it and i treated it like a jeep, using it for all kinds of off road adventures in addition to the typical abuse young men subject cars to. i haven't owned one since, but by the sound of it and from what i have heard they are still the same reliable well built vehicles, my vehicle needs are for a low gas mileage, city car right now but i would buy one for my family in a second if my car needs changed.... 

I just wanted to add that Subaru is Japanese for the Pleiades, and the Subaru logo is the Pleiades cluster.
I love that.

I had an Impreza WRX.  I felt the interior quality was a little chintzy.  I probably can't fault the WRX for this, but it got shitty gas mileage for such a small car.  Part of that may be because the WRX is a 226 hp beast.  So, if I had the normal 160 hp Impreza, it probably would have gotten better MPG.

I drive an all-wheel drive, all-the-time Land Cruiser now.  The thing about driving in the snow is that it's more about having snow tires and driving the right speed than it is AWD.  My wife has a 2WD Element with snow tires on it, and it handles noticeably better than my AWD with "all season" tires.

In the end, I'd probably buy another Subaru if they made one that wasn't so butt-ugly.

YMMV.

the original ones were manual shift in and out of four wheel drive, do they still make them with that option? i have never driven an awd car i don't know if fancy automation beats old-fashion do it yourself and keep it simple engineering...

i drive a jeep wrangler now BTW

I own a Subaru Outback and it's a great car in bad weather. It's also a great car even in good weather. Very reliable and sure footed. They are also very safe with the traction control, front and side airbags, anti-lock brakes, etc. They have good clearance enough that I feel good taking them on even poorly maintained forest roads (about 9" of clearance).

Install some Nokian winter traction rated tires and you might not need snow chains in many cases (http://www.nokiantires.com/tyre?id=1189 ... okian+WRG2). Although I do carry snow cables just in case it's really bad, but rarely ever need to put them on.

IMO. Get the six cylinder version. Good acceleration and great gas mileage. Today I averaged over 32MPG on the highway. City driving/mixed it's usually around 24MPG. It also uses standard unleaded so no premium fuel needed.

The hatchback is nice for hauling stuff like bikes, snow gear, furniture, etc. Sometimes I miss a trunk for keeping things out of sight, but the hatchback is much more functional. The interior is nice, but it's no BMW. But then again I'd take this car places that luxury cars really won't want to go. Plus, I feel it's probably more reliable. The boxer engine they use is well proven and smooth.

I co owned a 2003 Subaru Baja for 5 years. It was small 4 seater truck like vehicle on an Outback frame. It's still running strong. They only made it for a couple of years. I guess they dropped making them for marketing reasons. The steering and handling were superb. The center of gravity with the boxer engine was balanced and low. And with AWD it was near impossible to roll or even to get it to go into controlled skid. I tested it's limits on some hilly back roads- it wouldn't budge. It was fun to drive with rock solid handling. The fuel economy could be a bit better, but not bad, considering it's AWD. I'd get another Subaru.

Don't know if you're a buy-and-hold car owner like you are with the PP  , but I've owned the same Subaru (Forester) since 2000 and dude, that car is still going STRONG. It has just a touch under 200,000 miles and I swear it will go forever. And I will let it, let me just say.

But, then again, I'm the type to keep a car until it disintegrates. I don't see this car ever disintegrating! If you're a long-term car owner, it don't get no better than a Subaru.

I also don't know if you have teenagers or loved ones who are planning to be behind the wheel, but this is the car that my 19-year-old son will have when he leaves home. This is because this car is rock-solid safe and I love that child. He needs a car he can scratch up with whatever - his bike or what have you - and none of us will care, but it will get him super safely and dependably from point A to point B.

If you intend to own it long-term, then absolutely - go for the Subaru and never look back. But if you're looking to own a car just for a few years - don't know if you'll get the value out of it in that short of a time, because they are more expensive up front than their competitors. But oh my soul - that car would NEVER leave us on the side of the road and would NEVER break down on us. NEVER.

Thank you all for the good advice!

Craig:  have you owned any Nokian Hakkapeliitas (winter tires).  Crazy name and apparently a top-rated snow performer.  I'll swap summer tires out so not looking for an all-season tire.  Otherwise, the WRG looks very good. 

colorado4 wrote: Thank you all for the good advice!

Craig:  have you owned any Nokian Hakkapeliitas (winter tires).  Crazy name and apparently a top-rated snow performer.  I'll swap summer tires out so not looking for an all-season tire.  Otherwise, the WRG looks very good.

No I have not because I don't drive in enough snow to warrant them. I do use the winter traction tires WRG all year because they are good in wet weather which I do have a lot of. But in snow, they also do fine and are sure-footed. Basically in some mountain passes around here you are required to either carry chains, or have a tires with the winter traction rating on them (a little mountain with snowflake on it ):



http://www.snowtyres.com.au/severe-service-emblem

If you have either rated tires or chains, you are OK. If you have both, you can pretty much get anywhere if you car doesn't bottom out on the snow depth. But the traction rating means you have the protection on all the time in any kind of slick conditions.

But I have run the Nokians for years on all my cars. The Scandinavians know snow and they are very good tires. They sell a lot of them out in my area. They are more expensive than most, but way cheaper than wrapping your car around a tree!