bjwirth

I once saw a toyota with a "VTEC" badge on it:rolleyes: . Don't you guys get it, badge engineering is good for at least 10 HP.

35 MPG???!!! what hurts even more is that your WORST mpg is still better than my best mpg.

THis is all true, but i think the biggest reason is that the infrastructure wasn't there- where do you "fill up" on electricity outside your home. The same issue exists with hydrogen and natural gas cars today. Maybe these plugin hybrids will transition the way- but to me, this is as cumbersome as carrying a laptop with a zip, floppy, and cd drive because you want all your "bases covered." I'm personally a fan of hybrids- i think it's a good stopgap until we develop other technology. I only wish manufacturers would stop marketing it as a performance enhancement. (why do I need a 270hp highlander hybrid? give me a 200 hp highlander with better gas mileage) Getting back to the lexus portion of this thread, i think this issue points out why subaru has to introduce cars like the tribeca. Subaru owners are jumping ship, not because subarus suck, but because there isn't a car that meets their needs. No you can't make everyone happy, but you do have to carefully choose what markets to go into.

I'm not telling you to run out and buy this car, but buying a used car is always a gamble- even if you know the exact history of the car, that doesn't mean you'll know the future of it either. My wife bought a new imprezza back in 96. every 12-18 months, that car seemed to have an unrepairable flat. at one point, it had 4 different tires, with 4 different tread depths. The only time it had 4 tires the same was for the first 10k miles. we sold the car at 75k miles without knowing the implications of tire circumference- but no problems at all with the car. Our 00 forester has had a mismatched tire for the past 10-15k miles or so (I've lost track) and so far so good. Take this story for what it is- a story. Either we're lucky, or there's more to this tire spec than meets the eye. If you like this car, I'd explain the tire spec and the possible damage and negotiate some discount. Consider the discount you get on the car an insurance policy if transmission damage should occur. if you knock $1000 off, that's $1000 towards the repair if/when it should occur. IF not, it's a $1000 windfall.

Opinions vary on this, but here's mine. Based on what you said, I don't think going down a speed rating is that big a deal. My BMW calls for performance tires but I got sick of the low short tread life, the road noise, the bad wet/snow traction. So I went down a class and got some goodyear comfortreds. So basically I got what I wanted- quiet, long tread, good wet/snow but lost A LOT of dry performance. But no big deal- even with the low performance tire, my car still out handles a traditional car- I just cant do the high speed cornering anymore. Honestly, I regret the move a little- maybe 5% of the time, I wish I still had the performance (kinda how I feel about stick shift- don't care 95% of the time, but I SURE wish i had it the other 5%). BUT if your dad drives very conservatively like you say, I don't think it will matter for him.

I hate when people say "do this or do that" without giving a reason. Next thing you know it's "law." How often should the average driver change their oil? Jiffy lube says it's 3000 miles, so it must be law. But for me the cons would be: lower gas mileage, and louder engine drone. without asking the mechanic, it's hard to know why he said that.

Honestly, if you don't want to get a card, I'd say don't get it. On the other hand, if you are going to use a card, it may as well be a rewards card of some type. Like I mentioned before, I have a citibank card, and I get 5% for gas and groceries. I figure that's about$400 in CASH each year (spend $600+/month just in those 2 expenses) I think Discover card has cash back, but I'm not sure what their %'s are. We also charge about another $1000+/month on other miscelaneous stuff , but that only earns 1%. In this scenario, the subaru card would get us more "rewards" but be limited to subaru stuff. as an aside, if you want to hear a great scam (and this may fall under urban legend), way back when rewards cards were first introduced and the rules weren't as strict, there was a guy who would buy travelers checks with his VISA card every month. Because he was a memeber of AAA or some group, there was no transaction fee for this. so Everymonth he would simply cash the checks and pay off his credit card avoiding interest. basically he got 120,000 frequent flyer miles each year.

you'd better duck- tons of tire recomendations are about to fly in. As far as tire rack goes, I've bought tires from them before and have had overall good experiences. Their site is pretty easy to use- just take some of the recomendations with a grain of salt.

170???!!! really?? I hope you were on a track. "back in the day," I did 140 on a motorcycle for about 2 seconds. even then I thought I was crazy. I can't even imagine 170. Let's just say I feel like I cheated death once and I'll probably never drive anything into triple digits again. I'm not criticizing you, I guess I'm just surprised that a sube can go 170.

Rallykeith's link answers questions 1-3. As far as Q4, I personally think it's not worth it. you get a 3% reward, which is better than some of the other automotive rewards cards, but you are locked into Subaru. You can't even save up a decent amount for a down payment on a car, because they limit you to $500/yr. (not sure if that number can accumulate- i guess if it can, then it's ok) I edited this post, becuase i realized that maybe the rewards can accumulate so that you can save it up and buy a car or somehting. So maybe this isn't such a bad deal as I first made it out to be. I guess, I just prefer my citibank card which gives 5% for gas and supermarket, 1% everywhere else. it probably averages out the same, but I get a $100 check for cash instead of frequent flyer or GM points.

Did you buy the car used? Does it have an aftermarket alarm/remote entry? The reason I ask is that I once bought a viper alarm for a car a long time ago. The install guy asked me what kind of "settings" I wanted. one of them was to automatically lock and arm the car after the ignition was turned off after a set period of time.

Aint that the truth. we didn't have twins, but we have 2 less than 2 years apart and I can't imagine having twins. You said you were replacing the wife's car. Does this mean she'll be driving? Does she even care about performance? Buy whatever car you want, but I think there's going to be more important things to consider other than quartermile and 0-60 times when it comes to hauling your kids and all their gear. If you've got the money, buy 2 cars- that way you can have your cake and eat it too. But if you don't, its time to start prioritizing your life. But getting back to your question, check out the back seat of both these cars. We have a forester and we have 2 car seats in the back. the rear facing seat is behind the passenger seat and as a result the front is kinda cramped. I don't know how big the legacy back seat is, but you may want to check this out.

yes....err no. I'm not sure what you're asking. The residual is what it will cost you to buy the car at the end of your lease. The buy option is essentially $0. Some leases have a disposition fee (the fee if you want to walk away) but is usually waivable. The residual is also used in the calculation. No offense, but the car dealer must have been drooling when he saw you coming. This is the problem with leasing... most people don't understand it and dealers can take advantage of that fact. But don't worry, like anything else, knowledge is key. Here's a quick and dirty formula for calculating lease payments: (CapCost - Resid)/36 + (CapCost + Resid)*MF = PMT CapCost is the negotiated selling price of the car - down pmt Resid = MSRP * (%) [the percentage used is typically (but not always) based on ALG data. some companies like BMW use inflated residuals to lower payments] Like I said before, the deal you got doesn't seem bad at all considering what the lease payments were a couple of months ago. I'm just wondering what Subaru is doing (lower MF, inflated residuals, $$ in the trunk) to get the payment as low as what you got. If I didn't see the tribeca deal, I would have said you got a good deal.

MF is the money factor, other wise known as the finance rate for leases. it roughly correlates to APR interest if you multiply the MF by 2400. a MF of 0.00305 is like a 7.3% finance rate. 3 things determine your lease payment, the cap cost (final negotiated price less down payment), the residual (aka buyout) and the MF. The residual is set by the leasing company and is based on the number of miles driven for that particular model. The MF is also set by the leasing company, but dealers have been known to pad this number and take the profit. BTW, I just ran the numbers using the data from a couple of months ago, and my number came up MUCH higher. what this tells me is that subaru is probably doing it's employee pricing thing (aka summer clearance) and offering better rates and incentives.

when I said miles, I meant how many miles/yr THe residual takes into account what the future resale will be and is more or less on target. The only reason I said poor resale cars are bad lease candidates is because you are essentially financing more of the car. so if you have a car that has a high residual, you have more money to invest or spend elsewhere. That's not to say you are at a disadvantage when you are leasing, youre just not in as good of an advantage if you lease a low residual car. A couple of months ago, the subaru lease had the legacy at a 41% residual for a 3 yr 15k mile lease and a whopping .00305 MF. This sounds like a lot considering you can lease a tribeca for $2k down and 319/month for a more expensive car. Beleive it or not, I'm a big proponent of leasing. I actually like the advantages of leasing- but only if the deal is right. If you get some of those numbers, I can tell you exactly where the dealer is ripping you off.

I need more info to determine what kind of deal that is: -MSRP -Selling price -#miles -if this includes tax -is it $3000 down, or is it $3000 due at signing -MF and residual if you have it Normally leasing subarus is not that great of a deal because they don't tends to have great resale (Before I get flamed, I didn't say it had bad resale, just not GREAT resale)

grr.. I hit reply instead of edit.

You know I was searching the forums and came accross some posts about this TSB. I tried to go to the SOA website to find these TSBs but couldn't find them. Do you (or anyone) know where I can find this specific info or what exactly it said? THe car is a 00 forester S, purchased used from a lot (non subaru).

I had the rear O2 sensor replaced 18 months and 25k miles ago (car now has 90k). would the new O2 sensor crap out already? as far as the $70 charge, the dealer said it would be credited on the repair which is of little consolation to me since I'm probably not going to go back anymore.

get a tribeca

*sigh* Was coming home from a trip this weekend and the CEL comes on. since the car's due for an oil change, I bring the car in to the dealer and ask them to check out what's causing the CEL. Basically they tell me the catalytic converter has gone bad and will cost $960 to fix. I tell them I'll think about it. So when I go to the cashier to pay, I'm told the bill was $94.85. Apparently this dealer likes to charge you 1 hour of labor to check the codes. (somehow I can't believe it took more time to read a code than it took to change the oil) I had NO F-ing idea this was the dealer's policy. I've gone to my BMW dealer a couple of times when the CEL comes on, and all the service advisor does is plug in the scanner and tells me what the problem is and then I'm on my way. If anything I think these two behavior's should be reversed. Do all dealers charge you to check the engine codes?? If autozone does it for free, I'd think a dealer could be "close" as in $10-20 at the most. I naively thought if a bmw dealer does it for free, everyone else must also do it for free.

Are you implying that a $50k RX400 is affordable and $3.50 gas isn't?? I'm just kidding... I know what you mean about this trend. I'm considering buying a hybrid car now that this new energy bill looks like it will become law. I'm still trying to decipher this bill with its idiotic language, but it could mean a tax credit of up to $3400. (If anyone speaks "lawyer," I could use some help reading this bill). if only the tribeca was a hybrid....

I've read about hacked priuses which let you plugin overnight and let you get astronomical MPG numbers. But we should also look at 'well to wheel' efficiency which takes into consideration the efficiency of the refining process of crude or the efficiency of burning coal to produce electricity in addition to the efficiency of the car itself. The average car has a well to wheel efficiency of 19%. electric plugins have an efficiency of 21%, while hybrids have 32%. we can see that the electric only cars are more efficient overall compared to gas cars, but eclipsed by hybrids. If we can (wrongly) extrapolate these trends, adding a plugin to a hybrid would only add a marginal level of overall efficiency.

I will agree with you that 99+% of hybrid buyers will not recoup their money over the purchase of a similar gas car. I'd also like to add that most cars are terrible investments as well. But for some, that's not what its about. Right now hybrid technology is in its infancy if you look at it from a "mainstream" angle. And of course when any new technology is introduced, the early adopters pay a lot for it. But this doesn't mean hybrids are a "damaged engineering concept." In fact it's because of these early adopters that perhaps one day the cost of hybrids will come down.(remember when buying an entry level PC was $3000 during the 80's? that technology must have been damaged) Would you say that hybrids are flawed if you could buy a forester "XH" for $1000 more and while still maintaining the same 10-15 yr warrenty for the battery, a replacement was only $200? There are a lot of naysayers who criticize hybrid technology because of its upfront cost and fear of potential costs. Cost is a valid concern for consumers and their decision to buy, but let's evaluate the technology on its merit.

I don't know what happens in the board room of subaru, but if you want a good reason of why subaru is releasing the tribeca, it's called GROWTH. In fact you even give a good example of it- the introduction of the WRX/STi in the US. Sure the Outback and the Forester were selling well. Why do we need to bring in YET another variant of the impreza line?? The impreza wasn't "BROKE" so why did SOA try to "fix it" with an STi?? The bottom line is this- if a company doesn't have growth, it doesn't have a future. If you stand still and do the same thing (follow the mantra of if it aint broke dont fix it), everyone else will pass you. Subaru is already seeing this when families outgrow the outback and the forester and move over to bigger SUV's and minivans. I don't think the move is for pure profits... afterall the tribeca is competively priced. IT sounds like you have more of an issue of feeling left out of the modern Subaru culture and you are using the tribeca as a sounding board for your frustration.