sailhard Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 I was very let down when I test drove one last weekend. Very slow off the line, the 6 cyl only has power when redlined...My 6 year old daughter could not fit in the rearmost seats of the 7 passenger...visibility was pretty lousy, interior felt cramped, terrible on gas 19 mpg . Also cost close to 35k! I think they blew it in a big way... Same size car but totally better ( I hate to say as a subiphile) is the Nissan Murano. Rooooomy, fast, fun to drive, sexy exterior, smooth cvt tranny...Only bad was limited storage with rear seats up.. The wife wants to upgrade her 2000 forester soon... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s'ko Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 I was very let down when I test drove one last weekend. Very slow off the line, the 6 cyl only has power when redlined...My 6 year old daughter could not fit in the rearmost seats of the 7 passenger...visibility was pretty lousy, interior felt cramped, terrible on gas 19 mpg . Also cost close to 35k! I think they blew it in a big way... Same size car but totally better ( I hate to say as a subiphile) is the Nissan Murano. Rooooomy, fast, fun to drive, sexy exterior, smooth cvt tranny...Only bad was limited storage with rear seats up.. The wife wants to upgrade her 2000 forester soon... I haven't test driven a Tribeca b'c mostly I can't get past the nose. RE: the Murano, we test drove one of those, it was nice, but I have a huge problem buying a car for 35K or so that has the same cabin space as my OBS. if i really wanted to spend the 35K I would get a legacy GT and spend the rest on go-fast parts or something like that. Or get a WRX and spend the rest doing a JDM engine swap for my OBS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
outback_97 Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Have you seen the video comparing the AWD systems in Tribeca / Murano? http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1097949 It's not objective in the least if you listen to the narration (produced by Subaru, what do people expect?) but highlights some differences in the "AWD" systems. Not that I'm a huge Tribeca fan... but the AWD system in the Murano is unimpressive as shown here. Steve Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamal Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 I'd stay away from the CVT too. Even the ones Audi has been putting in the A4 turned out to be junk. Have you looked at the Honda Pilot? I'd say it comes down to how much you really need that rear seat. In this size vehicle it's not going to be much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manarius Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Yeah, the B9 Tribeca is late in the SUV game - Forester has all Subaru will need in the SUV market. Subaru should have used the money they spent designing the Tribeca to redesign the God-awful front end on the Impreza's and do some upgrading to the Forester. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PAezb Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 I test drove a Tribeca over a year and a half ago, and came away with basically the same impressions - poor visability, under-powered, handling marginal and over-priced. On the positive, fit and finish were very good, roomy in the front seats. If I were not already Outback stricken (I own 2), I'd seriously look at the New Toyota RAV4 or the Mazda CX-7 (not sure if the CX-7 has AWD though) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NV Zeno Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 I was very let down when I test drove one last weekend. Very slow off the line, the 6 cyl only has power when redlined...My 6 year old daughter could not fit in the rearmost seats of the 7 passenger...visibility was pretty lousy, interior felt cramped, terrible on gas 19 mpg . Also cost close to 35k! I think they blew it in a big way... Same size car but totally better ( I hate to say as a subiphile) is the Nissan Murano. Rooooomy, fast, fun to drive, sexy exterior, smooth cvt tranny...Only bad was limited storage with rear seats up.. The wife wants to upgrade her 2000 forester soon... Models to consider, in the Tribeca-class/size/price range: Toyota Highlander: Gotta have the V6; new for '07 third-row seating; great quality, decent mileage, one of the best in snow (after the Subaru, of course:D ). For "space for stuff" when all seats are used, nothing beats a minivan. Can't remember which models are available with AWD, but I've driven them all and the best of the bunch is the Mazda MPV. I think '06 is the last year of production though, but a one or two year old used one is still better than any Hyundai or GM product. Might want to consider the Mazda 5. A bit smaller than the MPV(about the size of a Tribeca and much lighter), only 6 passengers, but room behind the third row for "stuff"..more than all the 3-row SUV-types(like Explorer or Highlander), until you get up to the big dogs, like the Ford Expedition or Excursion. Great gas mileage, sliding doors, decent quality. New for '07 with 3 rows are Toyota RAV-4, and Hyundai Santa Fe (watch out for this one, a real POS). Toyota Sienna and Nissan Quest are great vans, bigger than the MPV (and probably more expensive), but very nice (not sure of AWD availability). Kia Sedona: '05 is similar to the MPV, similar gadgets and size, but the usual Korean quality. Kia Sedona: '07 is bigger, almost as big as the Toyota Sienna. Quite nice when new, but ages rather quickly, as most Korean cars do. IIRC, the Ford Freestar is available with AWD..quality between the Japanese models and the Koreans. Dodge Caravan: Haven't seen too many of these, but I think they're available in AWD also..the usual Chrysler quality. Just remembered..Ford Freestyle: 3 rows, AWD, minivan luggage volume..decent leg and headroom in all rows. Actually a really decent car..all the room of a minivan, but doesn't look like a van from the outside. Used model year '06's are hitting the market, new '07s are on the lots. If room for 3 rows of passengers AND all their stuff is necessary, forget about SUV-types and think minivan (or Freestyle). The SUVs have probably the least luggage space (3rd row in use), about that of a Corvette:rolleyes: . My 2 bucks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ron917 Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 GM's minivans are available with AWD (Chevy Venture, Saturn Relay, Pontiac Montana SV6). We have an '03 Montana (2WD version), it's roomy and comfortable, and so far perfectly reliable at 50K miles. The wife loves it, I hope she falls out of love with it before 100K miles so I don't have to change the spark plugs (looks like a nigthmare job). I think GM's crossovers (Chevy Equinox, Pontiac Torrent, Saturn Vue) are available with 3 row seats. I know they can be had with AWD. The Ford Freestyle has the Haldex AWD system from Volvo (Ford owns Volvo). My Dad has the Ford Five Hundred sedan, which is similar underneath but somewhat smaller. It has the same Haldex AWD and a CVT. The AWD works well in the snow, the CVT concerns me, but Dad is happy with it. The Five Hundred (and the Freestyle) is based on the Volvo S80 platform. It is very comfy and feels solid like a Volvo, but handles like a barge. I would seriously consider the Freestyle if I were looking for something that big that wasn't a truck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soutthpaw Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 Many companies are now promoting the CVT yet Subaru was actually on of the first to use it back in late 80's in the Justy, long story made short. IT WAS A PIECE OF JUNK!!! i changed one over from auto to stick myself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subarupusher Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 Same impressions on the test drive...handles well but underpowered. The sunroof is an afterthought when compared to the Forester or Outback. I came close to buying one anyway and am glad I did not pay for the 7 passenger sight unseen when they first arrived. The far rear seat is useless for anything more than kids that are too big for carseats but still need to be restrained via how cramped the leg space is. I do like the look of the cockpit and it is a very safe vehicle. About as sexy as a waxy shoebox from the rear. The Murano definitely wins that battle. I predict that in a model year or two the front and rear will be redesigned and a turbo engine will become available that will get the same gas mileage with 70 more HP. That will make the original owners grumble. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ratty2Austin Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 passenger room, and Decent gas milage http://www.fl-sprinter.com/Pass/pass.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fastwgn286 Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 GM's minivans are available with AWD (Chevy Venture, Saturn Relay, Pontiac Montana SV6). We have an '03 Montana (2WD version), it's roomy and comfortable, and so far perfectly reliable at 50K miles. The wife loves it, I hope she falls out of love with it before 100K miles so I don't have to change the spark plugs (looks like a nigthmare job). yeah, it is! $700 at the dealer, because they drop the engine. (my mom has one) mazda cx-7 is available with awd. the cx-9 is the 7 passenger one, though (also available with awd). i haven't been back to my former employer to drive one yet... mazda mpv is dead. it was nifty though, roomy and comfy. 1st gens had awd. but the ones with sliding doors never had it. mazda 5 really doesn't have that much space, and getting to the back row will take off your kid's head. although a frat did use one as a party shuttle before. that was hiliarious... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ericem Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 wow didn't know people hate the triebeca, and I see wayyyyyyyyyy more then foresters. and we sat in one, a there was to much leg room, looked way to nice,and dvd and nav is cool, but the dash looks stunning and I really like the exterior as well. me and my family odd to test drive one soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beataru Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 What about the new Yota Brick on wheels??? Ahem... the FJ Cruiser... ive heard mixed reports on them... the most popular was their way to expensive... tell me what you guys think! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manarius Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 wow didn't know people hate the triebeca, and I see wayyyyyyyyyy more then foresters. and we sat in one, a there was to much leg room, looked way to nice,and dvd and nav is cool, but the dash looks stunning and I really like the exterior as well. me and my family odd to test drive one soon. I don't know what you were smoking when you got in that thing, but the general consensus is that Subaru dropped the ball on the Tribeca. Underpowered, overpriced, poor leg room, and looks like rump roast. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Setright Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 It doesn't even have frameless windows. It's a shared platform product and it shows. Also proves that Subaru does it best alone Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon38iowa Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 It doesn't even have frameless windows. It's a shared platform product and it shows. Also proves that Subaru does it best alone Who is it shared with, Saab? John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamal Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 It doesn't even have frameless windows. It's a shared platform product and it shows. Also proves that Subaru does it best alone If by shared platform you mean based off a Legacy chassis, you're right. It has no relation with any Saab or GM vehicle. The 9-6x was supposed to be the Saab version of the Tribeca but that never happened. The 9-7 is nothing more than a Trailblaser/Envoy/Bravada/Ascender/Whatever else. Born from jets my rump roast. On the flip side Saab would no longer exist if it weren't for GM. Background for those not in the know: For a short period of time GM owned 20% of Fuji Heavy Industries and the result was the 9-2x, which is an Impreza wagon with a Saab grill and wheels. Recently GM sold their share and Toyota bought 8.7%. Toyota is going to to build Camries at the SIA plant . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1 Lucky Texan Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 Doesn't FHI make the Murano's transmission? hah! Carl Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hankosolder2 Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 It doesn't even have frameless windows. It's a shared platform product and it shows. Also proves that Subaru does it best alone What ARE the advantage(s) of frameless windows? I can see the point of it on a "pillarless hardtop" design, but all modern Subarus have B pillars. I always thought frameless windows were kind of a liability in terms of wind noise, water leaks and fussy adjustment requirements. Nathan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon38iowa Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 What ARE the advantage(s) of frameless windows? I can see the point of it on a "pillarless hardtop" design, but all modern Subarus have B pillars. I always thought frameless windows were kind of a liability in terms of wind noise, water leaks and fussy adjustment requirements. Nathan I don't know the advantages, but I do know I very much like the style. Guess I am showing my age. John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ericem Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 I don't know what you were smoking when you got in that thing, but the general consensus is that Subaru dropped the ball on the Tribeca. Underpowered, overpriced, poor leg room, and looks like rump roast. i dont smoke nothing. I sat in the high end one with 50 50 split front and rear seats, but again, I DIDNT test drive it, OK. I think it looks nice though, just depends what angle u catch it at. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nipper Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 What ARE the advantage(s) of frameless windows? I can see the point of it on a "pillarless hardtop" design, but all modern Subarus have B pillars. I always thought frameless windows were kind of a liability in terms of wind noise, water leaks and fussy adjustment requirements. Nathan There are a few advntages, but not on the customer side. From an engineering point of veiw, it makes for a lighter door, easier design, easy to seal and less wind noise nipper Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Setright Posted October 19, 2006 Share Posted October 19, 2006 Passive Safety! The door is less likely to get jammed shut in a collision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nipper Posted October 19, 2006 Share Posted October 19, 2006 Passive Safety! The door is less likely to get jammed shut in a collision. actually doors are prefered to get jammed shut in a collision as opposed to flying open and ejecting people. But now the new standard is no deformation of the passenger cage so the doors always work. heheh passive saftey is called the car not starting nipper Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.