Martinjmpr

I'm pretty sure my OBW has 205/70's so there's no reason a 205/65 should have any problems with rubbing. I was actually thinking of going to a 215/70 or 75 next time I need tires, just to give me a little extra clearance.

The Baja is US made (as are, I think, all of the Legacy models sold in the US. I think the Impreza line/WRX are imported, and I'm not sure about the Forester.) If you do a search, there was a thread that I posted on that linked to a Canadian message board, and that one had an article about the lackluster sales of the Baja. The good news (for buyers) is that the Baja's slow sales was compelling Subaru to offer some pretty good incentives and discounts.

Do you have a manual or automatic? The automatic should get slightly higher highway mileage. However, 24 sounds to me to be in the reasonable range. Could also be that your odometer is reading slightly "long", i.e., showing fewer miles than actually traveled, which would make your mileage seem lower (I have just the opposite problem on my OBW: It reads the miles "short" which makes me think I'm getting 29-30 when I'm really getting 26-27). Try measuring your distance with a GPS instead of the odometer and see if there's any error. There could also be an error in your speedo, which could be showing 65 when you are really going near 70. I can tell you from experience that when I switched from cruising at 75 to 65, I noticed a dramatic increase in my MPG. Even as little as a 3 MPH difference could cause your mileage to drop from 26 to 24 or so. Most GPS units can give you your speed as well and you can compare the GPS speed to what is indicated on your speedo. Finally, when you consider the boxy shape of the Forester (as compared to the Legacy or Impreza), I don't think 24 is out of line. UPDATE: Edmunds has your EPA estimate as 22/27 for auto and 21/28 for manual.

That seems a little high for a vehicle with 190 grand on it. I just ran a KBB on my '99 OBW with 73k on it and it came out to the $8,000-$13,000 range (although I take that higher "suggested retail" value with a large grain of salt), which seems to be about what I see them being offered for in ads. Even for a Subaru, those are some high miles. I think the thing to consider is, by the time a vehicle has that many miles, other things are getting ready to go besides the engine. The $2000-4000 that a new engine would cost you would be better applied toward a new(er) (not neccessarily new) vehicle. Just my opinion, but I think you've gotten about as much value out of this car as you're likely to get. Not that Subaru's can't go the extra mile (in this case, I'd say it's already gone much further than you would reasonably expect any lesser car to go) but with its high mileage, you may be throwing good money after bad. Probably also depends on what you intend to use it for. If it's just an around-town car and the prospect of a major failure wouldn't lead to anything more catastrophic than a 20-minute walk home, then maybe replacing/rebuilding the engine is a viable option. OTOH, if this is the car that's got to get you over the mountains in the dead of winter and a major failure could leave you stranded in the middle of nowhere in a blizzard, then, again, maybe you'd be better off cutting your losses.

I had the same thing happen to me a couple of times last Winter. Seemed to happen most often on cold days when the car had been sitting for a while. It only happened once or twice and then never again, so I'm not sure how serious it is. The Subaru is my first AT vehicle, and I have to confess I don't know much about them.

I like the Baja too, but I think we are in the minority. IMO, Subaru screwed up big time with their lame "switch back" mid-gate configuration. The original ST/X concept they were showing in 2000 was more like the Chevy Avalanche, i.e. the mid-gate was completely removable, so that large cargo (4'x8' sheet of plywood) could be carried there. Not sure why they wimped out and just put that little switchback door- could have been concerns about weather-tightness or noise. If you like the Baja, you might want to plan on getting one soon. Rumor has it that 2005 is the last year for them. Also, AFAIK, the Baja is a US-only model. Some people on this board have complained about the lack of a D/R transfer case and 6-cyl engine, but I think Subaru made the right call on these. A 4-door Subaru pickup that gets 18 MPG has no inherent advantages over a 4-door Toyota pickup that gets 18 MPG, particularly when the Subaru is likely to be as expensive (or more expensive) than the Toyota.

I think that's a myth. I'm not an engineer, but as I understand it, the octane rating of a fuel is the rating of the fuel's resistance to ignition. The higher the octane, the more resistant to ignition the fuel is (i.e., the more heat it takes to spontaneously ignite the fuel.) The reason high-performance cars and piston-driven airplanes need high octane fuel isn't because the fuel has more energy in it (I don't know if it does or not), rather, it is because these types of engines produce more power by using higher compression ratios. Higher compression = more heat, which means more likelihood of preignition (knocking or 'pinging'), which robs an engine of its energy and can actually be harmful to the engine. Bottom line, a normally aspirated engine that is designed to run on regular gas will not run any better on premium, unless preignition has been a problem. Subaru engines are designed to run on regular gas, so the extra money you spend on premium is probably wasted. Incidentally, octane ratings change with altitude. The 87/89/91 octane fuel you get at sea level is 85/87/89 in Colorado and Wyoming. I have gotten over 30 MPG on my OBW using regular, 85-octane fuel (though, as I've stated, this is calculated using my odometer, which may be off by 2%.) All it takes is a flat road, liberal use of cruise control and a light foot on the gas (I cruise at 55-60 mph when I'm not in a hurry to get somewhere.) Like it or not, the biggest killer of gas mileage is your right foot.

I'd say at least 300. I figure on about 350 if I'm in town, a little less if I'm on the road, just because gas stations are fewer and far between out here in Wyoming. I think I've gone up over 400 before I finally lost my nerve, but I don't think I've ever put over 14.5 gallons in the tank (capacity is supposedly 15.9 which should give you 429 miles @ the EPA estimated 27 MPG on the highway.) The other thing to consider is the accuracy (or lack thereof) of your odometer. I've got a GPS and have noticed that the GPS typically shows me traveling about 2% fewer miles than the car's odometer. Now, of course the GPS has an error, too, but it's probably smaller than the one on the car. So, in reality, I may only be getting 25 or 26 MPG rather than the 28 or 29 I figure using the odometer. As the saying goes, your mileage may vary.

It's a little like reading tea leaves, I suppose, but I wonder if the rise in gas prices might not help to rescuscitate demand for the Baja. I thought this part was interesting: LOL! I'm 42 and I love the Baja. To steal the slogan of the Nissan XTerra, it's "everything I need and nothing that I don't" Maybe SOA should do a little market research and find out what people really want. People responded well to the ST/X because it had the capability of acting as a real truck. My dream would be an ST/X style body, with the new Outback styling cues, a completely removable mid-gate and back glass, and an optional removable fiberglass shell for the rear area. A versatile vehicle that could function as a sedan, truck or wagon. But, since I won't be back in the states until December or so, I just hope they keep up those $1000 purchase incentives for another couple of months!

I guess it depends on what you consider decent mileage. I consistently get 25-28 in my '99 AT OBW. HIghest I ever got was about 31, lowest has been around 21-22. Remember that the OBW is not a tiny car, so it's unrealistic to expect 35+ MPG. I had a Mazda p/u that got nearly 40 MPG, of course, it was 2wd and so slow I named it the "silver slug" (I think it had a 90hp engine!) Most of the statistics I see show the MT Subarus getting slightly worse overall MPG than the AT versions. I assume this is because of the 50/50 AWD system.

Thanks for the info! Just confirms what I already thought. It's too bad Subaru didn't stick with the ST/X system they had at the auto shows in 2000. For those who haven't seen it (you can google it to find some pictures on the web), the original ST/X setup had the area between the bed and the cab that was able to completely disappear (like on the Chevy Avalanche). It also had a slightly larger, boxier bed. I don't know if Subaru thought that was too expensive or difficult to build, but I can't help but think that if they had stuck with that setup, maybe the Baja wouldn't be such a poor seller. Speaking of which, the rumor mill has it that '05 is the last year for the Baja. Can anyone confirm this?

Can someone who owns or has access to a Baja do me a small favor? I've looked all over but I can't find the following measurements: 1. Size of the "switchback" opening 2. Maximum cargo length with the "switchback" opened, from the back of the front seats to the front of the [closed] tailgate. 3. Is this entire length flat? I'm trying to determine if the Baja would make an acceptable camping vehicle. Thanks!

I think they're a waste of money on most vehicles, esp. Subarus. You still have 30k left on your bumper-to-bumper, and 54k left on your powertrain. If you took the cost of an extended warranty and invested it today, you'd have enough money for a catastrophic repair by the time you hit 100k miles, and the likelihood that you'd actually need it would be slim.

That's kind of my point. More people would be willing to buy them if they could get an A/T. I used to be a die hard M/T fan, too, but the reality is most people prefer automatics.

AFAIK, all of the Legacy-based cars sold in the US after 2000 have the LSD. According to Edmund's (www.edmunds.com), all Bajas have the LSD. According to the SOA website, all of the current (05) Bajas have LSD as well.

Been shopping [online] for a few weeks, looking at Baja's, and I've noticed something: Compared to the OBW, there is a much higher percentage of 5-speeds as compared to automatics (with the OBW I typically see about 75/25 AT/MT split, with the Baja, it seems like it's 15/85!) I assume this is because the Baja is marketed as a 'sporty' vehicle for predominately young males. Anyway, I wonder if maybe one of the reasons that the Baja has had 'disappointing' sales (as I read several months ago in a car magazine) is the high proportion of manual trannys. Some people just want an automatic, period. Before I got my OBW last year, I'd never owned a vehicle with an automatic tranny, but I quickly got spoiled. Still, as I shop for a Baja, my feeling is that the transmission will not be a deal breaker. I prefer an auto, but if I can save several thousand bucks by getting a 5-speed, I'll happily do that. Anyway, just an observation. Who knows, maybe it's regional? Has anyone else noticed the same thing in their area?

Heh heh - G-Man, nice to see some familiar faces here. It's weird how so many people with diverse interests frequent the same boards (I've run into several P-netters at some of the motorcycle boards I'm on.) The reason I asked the question is that Edmund's only lists the radios as being AM/FM Cassette or AM/FM CD, they don't include the weatherband. Oddly enough, even the Subaru web site only indicates that the '05 OBW has an AM/FM CD, no mention of WB. I don't know if that means it's been dropped or if they just don't mention it in their ads (which seems strange to me, if true.) But if the OBW had a WB radio as recently as '04, then that means if I get a Baja and it doesn't have the WB, I should be able to swap an OBW head unit, right? I mean, they're basically the same vehicle from the C-pillar forward, right?

They do have a door between the cab and the bed, which they call the "switch back" So, you could put something long and relatively skinny (like a small roll of carpet or a 2x4). I really *wish* they had made it more like the Chevy Avalanche, where the mid-gate and rear glass could be completely removed. Then all I'd have to do is add a topper and I'd have a great little AWD camper that could also be great as a small pickup, and still carry 4 adults when needed. I also agree with some of your other comments. The Outback package, for example, used to be a significant departure from the base model Legacy with high ground clearance and some unique features like the raised roofline, weather-band radio (one of my favorite features), and rear power outlets. Now it seems like the Outback line is just another trim level. As far as not offering an 'entry level' car, I think this is actually smart on Subaru's part. They simply can't compete with the volume sellers like Toyota and Honda (who can sell small cars at near-cost and make up the difference on their bigger models), nor can they compete with the growing Korean market (Hyundai and Kia/Suzuki). Currently Subaru seems to be 'niche marketed' as either a 'hip Volvo' or a 'smart person's Toyota'. I don't really know how far upscale they can go.

Not sure how to remove such odors, but here's what I do to prevent them (or minimize the odors): One of the things that causes odors like this is when running the AC in a humid environment, if you shut off the engine when the AC is still running, the cool temperature of your AC ducting will cause condensation to form and then mold grows where the condensation was. To avoid this, always turn off the AC before you shut off the car, and run the fan to get the AC ducting up to the same temp as the car. I think some custom shops have a treatment to spray into the AC vents to kill the mold, but I don't know if it's an expensive or difficult process.

When did Subaru stop putting a Weather Band radio in the Outback? I went to Subaru's current web site and it's not even listed as an option. I always thought it was a cool idea, since I vividly remember driving through a growing blizzard in Yellowstone and desperately scanning the radio dial on my 2wd Ford Ranger to try and get some idea of the weather forecast. The main reason I'd rather repair my current radio on my '99 OBW rather than replace the abysmal CD changer is that I don't want to give up the AM/FM/WB head unit.

Speaking of dropping out, has anyone heard any rumors about the Baja being dropped? I heard somewhere (can't remember where) that sales of the Baja were "disappointing." All the more reason for me to get one while I still can.

Maybe it's a snowbelt thing. In Colorado/Wyoming, Subarus are about as common as Volvos. If you ever want to get a table at a crowded restaurant in Boulder, CO, just say in a really loud voice "They're towing away a green Subaru" and watch half of the tables empty out! BTW, isn't getting GM to market the Impreza TS as a Saab an example of market repositioning?

I thought the difference between the M/T and A/T Subarus was that the A/T had the limited slip in the center diff, and the M/T just had a 50/50 split, all the time. Isn't that why the A/T gets better highway mileage under normal conditions? So, in that case, isn't the issue of the wrong-size-tire-destroying-transmissions moot? I thought that's why only A/T vehicles got the FWD fuze receptacle?

Four elements of a negligence tort: 1. The defendant had a duty to the plaintiff 2. The defendant breached that duty 3. The plaintiff had actual damage 4. The proximate cause (i.e, closest in time and place) of the plaintiff's damage was the defendant's breach of his duty to the plaintiff. In order to prevail in court, you have to prove all four of these elements. It's like the legs of a table: If any element fails, the whole thing fails. So, take them one at a time: 1. Did Wendy's have a duty to you, to protect your car against damage caused by flooding? I'd have to say it's questionable. You knew or should have known there was flooding. Forseeability is an element of this. Wendy's has a duty to protect its customers against forseeable damages, but cannot obviously be expected to protect its customers against a kind of damage that no reasonable person could forsee. How forseeable is radiator damage due to flooding? How common is it? Were there other people who drove through without getting damaged? If 50 customers sue Wendys for damaged radiators due to having driven through a puddle, it's one thing, but if there wer 500 drive through customers that day and you're the only one who had a problem, then they can argue that the damage wasn't forseeable. 2. Obviously this only applies if there is actually a duty to breach. 3. It seems pretty undisputable that you suffered damage, so this is a non-issue. However, secondary damages (the loss you suffered because you had to take time off work, etc.) will be more difficult to prove. 4. Proximate cause is another issue. If your car was the only one damaged, how do we know the problem was not due to some pre-existing damage to the car? For that matter, can you prove that it was the puddle at Wendys that damaged your car and not some other puddle? Do you have a disinterested (i.e., not related to you or a friend or acquaintance) who can testify that the fan and radiator were fine before the Wendy's trip and not after? As far as small claims court goes, you may be able to get a small settlement for nuisance value, but I doubt it. I'm not a lawyer (yet), but I think your chances of prevailing in this kind of a lawsuit are pretty remote.

Some questions about the Baja, since I'm thinking of trading in my '99 OBW on one: First, according to Edmund's the Baja has a temporary spare tire (I'm assuming the same kind of 'donut' spare that the OBW has.) Can this be right? I thought trucks or utility vehicles in general had full size spares? The Forester has a full-size spare, but maybe this is b/c the Forester was designed as an SUV (sort of) while the Baja is a converted OBW? Second question, is the spare in the Baja located in the same place as it is in the OBW (i.e., under a panel over the rear axle)? It just seems to me that since they 'stretched' the rear end of the OBW in order to make the Baja, they could have made the spare tire carrier big enough for a full size spare. The reason I'm asking all these spare tire questions is that I'm planning on driving up to Alaska next Summer and there's no way I'm going up there with a little donut spare tire. Thanks for any input. BTW, does anyone know of any company besides ARE that makes a "shell" for the Baja? The ARE shell looks pretty sweet, but I like to shop around.