Legacy777 Posted July 6, 2009 Share Posted July 6, 2009 The CVT trans is back. Hopefully Suby will do better with it than other makers. I hate CVT's! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nipper Posted July 6, 2009 Author Share Posted July 6, 2009 I hate CVT's! I am withholding my judgement, but they seem to have gotten the bugs out of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flowmastered87GL Posted July 6, 2009 Share Posted July 6, 2009 I am withholding my judgement, but they seem to have gotten the bugs out of them. I guess we will find out in 10+ years. If they all disappear like the justy CVT then they failed. If they are still around like all the 5 speed dual ranges out there then they succeeded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nipper Posted July 6, 2009 Author Share Posted July 6, 2009 I guess we will find out in 10+ years. If they all disappear like the justy CVT then they failed. If they are still around like all the 5 speed dual ranges out there then they succeeded. Justy CVT was a completly different animal. Usually the issue was the brushes failing on the wierd powdered metal clutch they used, the trannys themselves would keep working. The CVTs in the Prius are reaching 100K in the US. http://wikicars.org/en/CVT There are quite a few out there, though i will say subarus being the first to use a chain will be interesting to watch. nipper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bheinen74 Posted July 6, 2009 Share Posted July 6, 2009 out of all the cars to use a CVT, the Subaru is going to be the hardest on them due to the AWD and the extra wear due to that fact. I bet in 10 years, people are looking for D/R to swap in place of the CVT They are nice and smooth when new though. good idea if it works for the long haul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nipper Posted July 6, 2009 Author Share Posted July 6, 2009 out of all the cars to use a CVT, the Subaru is going to be the hardest on them due to the AWD and the extra wear due to that fact. I bet in 10 years, people are looking for D/R to swap in place of the CVT They are nice and smooth when new though. good idea if it works for the long haul Ford 500 AWD Mercury Montego AWD Saturn View AWD Toyota HIghlander Ford Escape Hybrid Audi A6 Audi A4 Many AWD and many much heavier then the sooby. Though the one on thier I would least trust would be the saturn. My only question is can it hold up to 300,000 miles of driving. 100,000 is acceptable for the avg car (though 160 is expected). But for a sooby it has to be 300,000 miles. nipper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EVOthis Posted July 8, 2009 Share Posted July 8, 2009 Anyone else had one of these 2010 outbacks in the air yet?..Man..Its different...like liquid filled motor mounts...different locations....pitching stopper is relocated to the like the lower rad. support...the drain plugs are no longer the 17mm...the engine cradle looks welded to the underside of the "frame/side rails"...the starter now looks like a PITA to get too......Man its a completely different monster...no more PDI diag. connector.well...the little fuse in the underhood fuse box is the PDI connector.....I think the 2010 Outback looks alot like the tribeca... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nipper Posted July 12, 2009 Author Share Posted July 12, 2009 http://www.subiesport.com/site/2009/07/2010-legacy-cvt-36r-gt/ nipper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
subaruplatt Posted July 12, 2009 Share Posted July 12, 2009 Looks like a camry crossed with a masda. Sad but it's how all the new cars look. Who said roger rabbit wasn't an influential movie. I'm more concerned with the fact that toyota is gradually steam rolling over Subaru. Is this built on camry platform or something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bheinen74 Posted July 12, 2009 Share Posted July 12, 2009 The top-mounted intercooler is larger by 25-percent and the turbo placement is now under the car, resulting in more power, sooner than ever. The stock performance is noticeably better off the line and the trick puts the Subaru turbo more in line with the very likable VW 2.0 turbo’s performance curve. not sure what to think. it is now comparable with a 2.0 vw:eek: an this is a 2.5? how do i fit a ej22t into this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subaru_dude Posted July 12, 2009 Share Posted July 12, 2009 Except for when you loose a belt, the water pump starts leaking, your low on coolant, the thermostat gets stuck open or closed. Proper mantainance would prevent all that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JGromada Posted July 13, 2009 Share Posted July 13, 2009 I think this falls in line with the majority of other Japanese cars in terms of styling. I think Subaru has gotten more conservative if anything in their styling. The horse collar design of a few years back seems to have been abandoned (thankfully). That being said I think the front grille area is very attractive. I know some may find it bland and it is a matter of personal taste. I'm still not a big fan of the interior center console design. Way too gimmicky. I much prefer most BMWs in this regard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
njdrsubaru Posted July 23, 2009 Share Posted July 23, 2009 i test drove the outback with a cvt yesterday, and here is what i think... the car is nice but the tranny garbage! lol sorry i could never get used to it, it feels like it is slipping all the time, i even floored it and the thing didnt move, it only revved up... but overall i am very impressed with the vehicle.. i would take a 6spd manual base model in a heartbeat! i also testdrove the 3.6 legacy with the 5spd auto tranny.. that was diffrent i would def take that one.... just my thoughts after test driving them... i love the ground clearance on the outback i love the design and it is soo comfy.... FYI they went from coilpack to coil in each of the plugs and and and plastic intake manifold!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bheinen74 Posted July 23, 2009 Share Posted July 23, 2009 (edited) i test drove the outback with a cvt yesterday, and here is what i think... the car is nice but the tranny garbage! lol sorry i could never get used to it, it feels like it is slipping all the time, i even floored it and the thing didnt move, it only revved up...! oh boy. I saw the 2010 outback with CVT at a dealer saturday man that thing is HUGE. TOO Huge. I don't like that big of car. its a truck/suv now, not a wagon. It's tall, the front is high in the air reminds me of a mini van. cross that one off MY list. Makes the Forester look tiny.- i hope i get this Baja, its a lot more my taste Edited July 23, 2009 by bheinen74 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nipper Posted July 23, 2009 Author Share Posted July 23, 2009 oh boy. I saw the 2010 outback with CVT at a dealer saturday man that thing is HUGE. TOO Huge. I don't like that big of car. its a truck/suv now, not a wagon. It's tall, the front is high in the air reminds me of a mini van. cross that one off MY list. Makes the Forester look tiny.- i hope i get this Baja, its a lot more my taste Its an inch smaller then the old outback, but 4 inches higher. Oddly enough, its the same height as Blu now (97 with a lift kit) and as much clearance. But its not in blue. nipper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bucky92 Posted July 23, 2009 Share Posted July 23, 2009 I am not crazy about them either.. way too big looking.. heck I think my Legacy wagon is a boat. I prefer smaller also. Whats funny is.. my Imp is just about the same size as my lego yet it feels and handles so much smaller.. I am definately keeping the light, quick, and nimble. But I am also thinking on selling my legacy and looking into an older Forester..not sure yet. the 4 inches taller would be great...if it was all in ground clearance..but the whole profile of the car is huge... its all Meh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subaru_dude Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 I saw one at our dealer too. Don't care about styling myself, it's what inside that counts. LOVED the room. Even with the front seat all the way back, I had PLENTY of leg room in the rear. Very comfortable too. Cubic feet is important to me also, 71 cubic feet of cargo space with seats down is impressive (pretty pitiful when compared to the tiny EA82s that had 74 cubic feet of cargo space though). Good clearance and it seems like it would be great for backwoods excursions. Didn't drive it so can't comment on that part. I personally prefer a higher profile, but I can see shorter people (I'm 6'3") having trouble using the roof rack. But overall... even with all that extra room, it should have more given it's size. It is officially a crossover now. They're heading the way of Honda and Toyota it seems. SELL SELL SELL!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legacy777 Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 i test drove the outback with a cvt yesterday, and here is what i think... the car is nice but the tranny garbage! lol sorry i could never get used to it, it feels like it is slipping all the time, i even floored it and the thing didnt move, it only revved up... but overall i am very impressed with the vehicle.. i would take a 6spd manual base model in a heartbeat! i also testdrove the 3.6 legacy with the 5spd auto tranny.. that was diffrent i would def take that one.... just my thoughts after test driving them... i love the ground clearance on the outback i love the design and it is soo comfy.... FYI they went from coilpack to coil in each of the plugs and and and plastic intake manifold!!!! That's the thing....I don't like CVT's! I've driven a Nissan with it, and is feels like it's slipping, and not really accelerating that much. I think if you drive like a grandma (no offense meant to hell-raising grandmothers out there ) the CVT could prove to be ok. However if you tend to drive a little like me the more frequent & harder acceleration will probably cause WORSE gas mileage. Just my thoughts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nipper Posted August 13, 2009 Author Share Posted August 13, 2009 Well while Blu was distracted getting his annual inspection (turn your headlights and cough please), i got into a 2010 outback. It was a short drive, and yes it was Blue. The car was a 2.5L CVT. Observations; Why does an auto have a hill holder? Tons of rear seat leg room. No folding up the rear seat bottom for a flat luggage floor. Very comfortable. Huge cargo area. The CVT will get you speeding tickets untill you get used to it. Mentally we all use the shift points to help judge our speed (think about it). NO shift points and the power just keeps coming. I was way over the posted speed limit before i knew it. Roof is taller then Blu's. If the imprezza can have 2 cup holders and a handbrake, why cant an Outback? Stereo is still sort of made for the car, but I am sure someone will come out with a kit. Ride is smooother then Blu's, but didnt feel wallowy. Steering is lighter then Blus at low speed (sometimes Blu's feels too heavy for me with the bad back). Blu has the same front realestate as a new imprezza, so the outback feels roomier. The car did not feel large or heavy, but then again i didnt throw it around like Blu. The more i looked at the 2010 the smaller it got ( i was staring at it for 10 minutes). Under the hood seemed more roomy for the 2.5, and the plugs look easy to get to. CVT would be quick to get used to. The dealer didnt have any 6 cylinders to drive, as he has been selling foresters like hotcakes and selling his 09 outbacks. He said in a few weeks he would get a steady Outback supply. Would i buy one? It would be between a 2010 and a Jeep. WOuld I replace Blu, only if he got fatally bent. Blu is paud for with only 60K on his engine, and 70K on his rebuilt AWD unit. The things I dont like about blu: With the back seat bottom flipped up can't recline the front seats. More front legroom Dashboard vents sometimes freeze me or bake me. Broken driver seat heaters (anyone have a procedure for r and r the heaters?). For all his miles he has only one or two rattles, and that wont get me to spend 27,000.00. I'm even thinking of getting him Lasik (projector beams). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ericem Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 hmm compared to my turbo 94 SS i found a 2010 legacy basemodel cvt extremely slow, there is no power. It seems like it is just struggling insanely. What I do know for fact is my 94 SS will continue to be restored to brand new as test driving a brand new 2010. Honestly my 94 SS I am sure was just as quiet when new with new wheel bearings and seals. As is my 94 SS is extremely quiet just my motor doesn't constantly moan...... Steering seems way to light to me and there was no pep, I like a car that can throw me in the seat. I am sure with the 6 speed it would have been pretty good though but none instock. Ill check back soon to try a 6 speed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nipper Posted August 13, 2009 Author Share Posted August 13, 2009 hmm compared to my turbo 94 SS i found a 2010 legacy basemodel cvt extremely slow, there is no power. It seems like it is just struggling insanely. What I do know for fact is my 94 SS will continue to be restored to brand new as test driving a brand new 2010. Honestly my 94 SS I am sure was just as quiet when new with new wheel bearings and seals. As is my 94 SS is extremely quiet just my motor doesn't constantly moan...... Steering seems way to light to me and there was no pep, I like a car that can throw me in the seat. I am sure with the 6 speed it would have been pretty good though but none instock. Ill check back soon to try a 6 speed Comparing a turbo to a N/A car is just silly, of course it is going to feel slow. nipper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ericem Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 OK compared to my 93 Legacy wagon (btw rip ) it was still VERY slow not extremely. My 93 Legacy is much more responsive. Shifting is alot better then creeping to 5500 rpm's and staying there like something is sleeping as it slowlllllly gains speed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now