Which is better, Legacy or Outback?

[cato47]

I'm getting ready to buy one of these cars for my wife. In your opinion which of these (2) models is the better bet taking the following into consideration?

 

1.) Great gas mileage

2.) Will go 250.000 miles

3.) Minimal engine repair

4.) Maximum reliability overall

5.) 5spd or Automatic which is more reliable?

 

I already know about the 2.5 and it's being prone to head gasket failure so I'm definitely out on the 2.5 engine. Please tell me why you stand behind the pick you are suggesting. I can't be talked into a 2.5 so please don't even try.

 

Lastly, up to what year was the 2.2 available in the Outback?

 

Thanks,

 

Rick

 

I'm gratefull for this site, it saved me from buying an Outback with a blown head gasket that I( was going to fix myself. After reading 100 posts about the situation and the frequency of it happening, I changed my mind. Now you know why the 2.5 is out of the question.

[Tiny Clark]

I have a 96 Legacy with a 2.2, not sure if the outback had the 2.2 or not. Basically the same car, but the Outback sets higher for more ground clearance.

[cato47]

I have a 96 Legacy with a 2.2, not sure if the outback had the 2.2 or not. Basically the same car, but the Outback sets higher for more ground clearance.

 

Thanks Tiny

[idosubaru]

i have a 97 and 98 OBS (Outback Sport) and really dig the car. picked it up for my wife (i drive all older subaru's) and love it. they both have the 2.2 liter motor, so it's available at least up until 98 i suppose.

 

it's not the fastest thing on the block, but a great car.

 

definitely get AWD.

 

in general manual trans vehicles are capable of more miles and fewer problems. but you can also go 200,000 + on an auto and never need to touch it...a manual will likely need a clutch unless you're very good to it. but that's not a big deal, not something that will leave you stranded, just maintenance if you wear it out. the auto trans are quite reliable, not really a bad point for the newer subaru's. be careful with towing and tire size to protect the trans. install a transmission cooler if you get an automatic, that's always good insurance.

[benebob]

Well a legacy sits lower so it'll handle better, has more road style tires so it'll brake better (easy to change though), will get you slightly better gas mileage (1 mpg at best) and finally can be had cheaper because it just isn't as "cool" since it isn't painted like an SUV. I think the Limited Slip rear (very nice to have and worth any added cost if you live near snow) is available on more variations of Outbacks but just on the GT for the Legacy (which would be my choice if I was looking esp a 02 or newer since it'll have the side impact airbags).

[AFviper]

The 2.2 was available on the 95 Outback in both auto and manual. Although the 95 Outback was the same as a Legacy just had a few cosmetic differences. The 96, first model year of a "real" Outback had a 2.2 on the 5 spd and 2.5 on the auto, starting in 97 it was all 2.5 engines.

 

Go to http://www.cars101.com/ to get more info. You can find almost any stat on Subarus there.

[subie94]

myself,i'd get the outback with a ej-22 (2.2 engine)

 

more ground clearance (it's your best friend)

[JohnVT]

i have a 97 and 98 OBS (Outback Sport) and really dig the car. picked it up for my wife (i drive all older subaru's) and love it. they both have the 2.2 liter motor, so it's available at least up until 98 i suppose.

 

The OBS is an Impreza, isn't it?

I like the manual tranny best, but some have experienced clutch problems, and others say they last 100k or more...

[Subarupete]

Hey Rick. One thing to keep in mind when looking at getting a car for your wife. Know the history of the car. The miles, how many owners, service records, any major accidents, and so on. Newer Outbacks and Legacy's haven't been having the gasket problems mentioned, and I work at a Subaru dealership. The 2.5 isn't a bad option on the new cars. They're WAY safer, come with more options, and less history to worry about. I'm a big fan of Subaru, the Outback and Legacy are both incredible cars. I'd go Outback for my wife. It would be easier to put in kids car seats or groceries.

[Sydfloyd44]

Have a 95 Legacy Sedan L. I also recommend making the ground clearance a very high priority in your decision. It is probably the thing I most dislike about my Sube. As far as the engine, the 2.2 gets the job done and after 147,000 miles, virtually trouble free with no major/expensive repairs. I'm sure the 2.5 would probably make a big difference in it though!

(had my original clutch replaced at well over 100,000 miles)

 

Outback AWD with a 2.2 would get my vote.

[benebob]

Ground clearance? You boys are crazy! I've taken my SVX with summer z rated tires through 2 feet of unplowed snow in the mountains of PA with not even a flicker of trouble. Lower is much better when it comes to on road driving. Don't believe me go take an Outback out and do a moose test at 65 when wet and watch the rear end pass ya. Do the same thing in a legacy and you won't see that. Off road sure hut unless you're driveway is horrible or you want to rallyx it (which by the way I've done in an SVX grated it had more clearance than a paltry outback does)

 

Not sure where the easier to put kids in a car seat comes from regarding the outback. That's a good one since the door opening is exactly the same since the door is exactly the same.

[fnlyfnd]

I think an outback would do just fine with a moose test. Of course if you have crap stock tires on it you could get the back end to swing out, but it shouldn't be really hard to correct. Granted I have not had the oppurtunity to do a moose test at highway sppeds, but I have messed around in a snowy parking lot at about 30 and it held up very well for having some dunlop sp40 a/s. If I could think of a place to do something like this at the sppeds you are talking I would go out tommorow (or the next wet day) as you have eroused my curiosity. I have been really impressed with the handling that my outback displays, though the body roll is quite a bit. When I took it on a test drive the guy took me on some twisty road telling me to lay into it, of course I was not going to drive it too hard on a test drive, with a car I have no idea on what to expect. Since then I have driven it hard in the turns and it has blown my mind on how well it performs, this has always been on dry pavement. I taken some turns decently fast in the wet, but never wanted to push it too much cause the dunlops aren't very good, and I either have parked cars, houses, or guard rails too look out for. Just for reference I had eibachs and bilstiens on my jetta coupe that I owned before this, and all my other cars were sport cars but none had suspension upgrades.

[nipper]

After having a 98 legacy and a 97 obw, i'ld say the outback. it rides higher, handles a bit better, and the front end doesnt do crunch everytime i park it hear one of those of those parking space stops. Also i like the height adjustable seat and the winter package.

 

 

nipper

[fnlyfnd]

yea, yea what he said ^^^^^^^^^

[teppichkopf]

I just bought a '96 OBW. I've had '91 and '93 wagons previously. Both automatics. One acted fine. The other was developing serious shifting problems before I sold it. My new OBW is a 5 sp so I look forward to never having to worry about how the previous owner(s) drove it. Unless you have full service records it's always a gamble on the autos. (Unless you figured a possible rebuild into the price.)

 

I'm also looking forward to the extra clearance on the OBW. That'll come in handy everytime I head into the hills.

 

And of course I look forward to doubling up the miles on the EJ22 at it's 130k mark.

[rweddy]

The only year of a legacy outback is the 96 5sp, the auto got the 2.5.

 

I have had both and like the outback best, ride, looks, options, etc.

 

But since you are set on the 2.2, you might have a hard time finding one since you can only get a 96. This being said you might want to go drive both. 96 are getting hard to find, especially without tons of mileage.

 

If you do fall in love with the outback, the 2.5 is not such a terrible motor.

[Gnuman]

OK, I will agree with you that the original EJ25 is probably the worst engine Subaru ever made 9meaning it is only 3x better than any other engine,versus Subaru's regular 10X better), but the later models of the EJ25 are a lot better than this. If you do find yourself backed into a corner due to the limited availability of the EJ22 engine, go for an '03 or later, as that was the year they (supposedly) finally fixed the headgasket problem. The original problem (internal headgasket failure between the combustion chanber and the cooling jacket) was "corrected" with a new headgasket design (much better than the original one) which may solve the problem entirely, barring mechanical failure (broken parts). the 99-03 EJ25 SOHC has a a smaller problem with the headgasket leaking to the outside world, which Subaru "solved" with an additive (stop leak) that they believe in enough to extend the warranty to 100K miles if you add it. That is a fairly strong vote of confidance in my book.

 

Engine issues aside, the Outback generally gets more goodies, as it has the name recognition, and therefore higher "value". If you are driving it yourself, and deep snow is not an issue, I would get the Legacy, as you will get it a bit cheaper, and it handles a good bit better. I was test driving an Outback that I was fixing (bought it to repair and resell) and came up on some of the corners that I regularly drive in my 92 Leg. The '92 has bad shocks 9worn) and the Outback had really good shocks (tested them after this), the outback dipped to the point I thought it was gonna roll, where the 92 Leg just sailed through the corners almost like they were not even there. . .

 

Will it go 250K miles? I say yes on any of them.

Great gas milage? Go for the Legacy (less drag, taller gears)

Handling? Legacy there, by a good measure.

Manual or Auto? Manual. Much better performance, and better reliability.

 

My vote is for a early Legacy wagon (98 or before) so you get the EJ22. 96 or earlier is best, as those are non interference engines, and more reliable. with a manual transmission

[rweddy]

OK, I will agree with you that the original EJ25 is probably the worst engine Subaru ever made 9meaning it is only 3x better than any other engine,versus Subaru's regular 10X better), but the later models of the EJ25 are a lot better than this. If you do find yourself backed into a corner due to the limited availability of the EJ22 engine, go for an '03 or later, as that was the year they (supposedly) finally fixed the headgasket problem. The original problem (internal headgasket failure between the combustion chanber and the cooling jacket) was "corrected" with a new headgasket design (much better than the original one) which may solve the problem entirely, barring mechanical failure (broken parts). the 99-03 EJ25 SOHC has a a smaller problem with the headgasket leaking to the outside world, which Subaru "solved" with an additive (stop leak) that they believe in enough to extend the warranty to 100K miles if you add it. That is a fairly strong vote of confidance in my book.

The HG issue is a shoot in the bucket, my buddies 97 has 160k no issues, my father in laws 03 with 36k just blew the HG. HG failure is over publicized here on this list, somewhere in the 10-20% failure range.

[fnlyfnd]

My firend has a 99 legacy 30th anniv. edition. Its a 2.5 auto with about 130-140k on it. he has had no major problems and has owned it for the last 60-70k.

 

I drove 6 hours (1 way)to get a 96 outback, 2.2, 5spd . It was well worth it.

[charlierh2]

Get a 2.2 Legacy, unless you really need the ground clearance for offroad (I dont count snow unless your in deep ruts and at risk for getting high centered). You'll love the better handleing and less roll.