IL Track Tested: 2010 Subaru Outback 2.5i

Mediocre numbers, even with the help of the stick.

The 2.5 was a top of class base engine 10 years ago. Made the then small Forester and Outback quicker than more than a few competing V6 models.

Two generations of fattening Subarus and fastening competition later, it's not keeping up.

Yet this thing only weighs 3,377 lbs, that's not too bad.

I guess you can lower the Outback and de-equip all the off road stuff and make it a Legacy wagon? Is the major part of the body and frame identical to Legacy?

Yet another example of "bigger is NOT always better". Manufacturers keep growing the midsized segment...to keep up with who? I had a '02 Outback. Loved it and to this day still one of my favorite cars...until we had a third child. Unfortunately the original Tribeca was too ugly to own no matter how well it drove! The point being, if the outback was not big enough you could by then move up to the Tribeca.

I was a fan of the now last gen Legacy, too! I'm not so sure about the new one. I have a '03 Mazda 6 that I will likely soon look to replace. The new 6 doesn't interest me becuse it too has outgrown what made my car so appealing to me. The Legacy had also been on my short list to test drive, but alas it is bigger than I am looking for. Oh, well.

By the way...forgot to mention that this new Outback is kind of fugly!

I love the subaru outback, always have wanted one for its practicality, but I can't get used to the exterior design on this new generation. Throw it in the pile of "not-as-good-looking-as-last-year's" models coming out lately (Acura TL, TSX, etc). Those headlights make me scratch my head.

If you move up to the Premium or Limited trim levels, you get larger 17" wheels and tires, which likely would help handling a tad.

Still, given this car's mission, I think the results are fine. Most Outback owners don't push these cars to their limits. In fact I bet most customers will be far more impressed by the gains in interior space, than in slalom times.

Same thing has happened to the Forester. Subaru, like Acura, is losing what once made it special.

And meanwhile Subaru is coming off its best sales month ever, and is one of the few companies posting a gain for the year. Forester August sales are up 76% over last August, and Outback sales are up 53%. So they must be doing something right.

http://media.subaru.com/index.php?s=43&item=102

"By rsholland on September 2, 2009 6:08 AM"

Not neccesarily. It means that the old Legacy was selling well. The new Forester speaks for itself. It is heads and shoulders above the older model that it replaced last year. It's no surprise that its sales are up. It remains to be seen on how well this new, larger Legacy/Outback does.

What is it with Subaru and nose jobs? The previous generation Outback wasa very handsome car but the revised grill looks just awful.

I have an 06 Legacy wagon and I miss it too... in 07 they did away with any manual in the wagon (why I got an 06) and then 08 did away with the wagon completely which was a bummer. I agree that the new legacy and outback are just a little too big. My legacy is a little tight in the rear seat for anybody over 6 feet tall but mainly just getting back there because it's so low to the ground. Once your back there it actually has decent room. The forester however needed to be bigger as the old one was cramped.

The one thing must give props to subaru was figuring out how to add that much size and only add around 50 lbs. My legacy wagon is lighter than the equivalent accord/camry/6/malibu back in 06 even with it's AWD and wagon body style.

Handling is more than about slalom times. A well balanced car is safer during accident avoidance and when a lack of basic car control skills comes into play.

Too bad the GT wagon is gone. I never bought into the Outback marketing and all the silly looking plastic cladding.

I should say that I think that Subaru did a nice job with the new Forester. I like the nose much better than the one on my '07. But the Outback grill pushes into the block Accord territory, which I don't care for either.

The company really needs to upgrade the engine, it is barely adequate in my Forester, I can't imagine how it fares in the heavier Outback.

"By bankerdannyAuthor Profile Page on September 2, 2009 8:08 AM"

A new H4 engine is on the way, but could be a couple of years off. As to weight, the new Outback is about 50 pounds heavier than than the old model, depending on trim level. So, even though it's larger, it's not much heavier.

Holy smokes subytrojan hasnt commented on this one yet? His was the first I expected to see. I hate being thrown off like that.

Really the H4 isn't that bad of a motor. With 4speed auto it's a dog off the line and also with manual although it's not as bad. In 2006 they added variable valve timing and it helps the motor be a little more sprightly. The 50/50 AWD just really takes getting used too... it saps power immediately off the line and makes the car feel like a dog but once the car is rolling and the engine spools up it's decently quick from there. With a downshift or two especially on the freeway the car never really feels underpowered. I would think the 6 speed would help even more...

I was going to say check out the 1/4 mile time that's not in proportion to the 0-60 time. Usually a car with a 9.4 0-60 time is doing the 1/4 mile in the low 17's but this one seems to be quicker the farther it goes.

My wife and I picked up the new Legacy, trading in an '08 Legacy so its easy for me to compare. Both were automatics but the new one is CVT, which is leaps and bounds better and getting the 170 horses to the pavement. Maybe the numbers don't reflect it but the real world feel is there. The '08 would stop pulling the car when you hit 50-60 but the new one pulls from the get go all the way till you hit interstate speeds. The new model also passes on the highway quicker. I believe its the CVT transmission that changes the whole character of the car. On the road, its floats like the old one didn't. It eats road imperfections without any chassis hop and the seats are 10 times more comfy. We liked the '08 model a lot, but the new one is just so much better. In truth I wanted the outback, but the wife wanted the sedan look. Maybe the raised height of the outback changes some of the dynamics from the Legacy.

I was trying to draw you out, carswapper. Hehehe. The new Outback is meh imo. Bring back the Leggy wagon, SOA!!! :mad:

All I can say is WOW but in a bad way. The Tribeca gets better track numbers.

0 - 30 (sec): 2.8
0 - 45 (sec): 5
0 - 60 (sec): 7.8
0 - 75 (sec): 12.1
1/4 Mile (sec @ mph): 16.1 @ 86.1
30 - 0 (ft): 32
60 - 0 (ft): 127
Braking Rating (Excellent, Good, Average, Poor or Very Poor): Average
Slalom (mph): 62.2
Skid Pad Lateral acceleration (g): 0.78
Handling Rating (Excellent, Good, Average, Poor or Very Poor): Good
Db @ Idle: 41
Db @ Full Throttle: 63
Db @ 70 mph Cruise: 73

"The Tribeca gets better track numbers."

So? The Tribeca has a 6 cyl that gets much worse mileage and cost $11,000 more (in Canada anyhow).

I'm sure the 6 cyl Outback will be much faster too.

You can fix the Outback handling just by replacing the 215 70 series tires. Even my 91 legacy wagon uses 65 series tires.

I'd prefer that they drop the Outback and kept the Legacy wagon but I guess there are more people who buy for the "outdoor" image then just for a great car.

This is an absolutely terrible design. There is nothing unique about this outback. It can't even get away with being smei-cool. All of the models before this are far better as far as styling and I even considred getting one myself. Although for versatility more than style, the style was still very good for a wagon.

I never looked at the Outback before because it was stupidly small and narrow. The back seat was large enough for a toy poodle and a briefcase. Oh Boy!

But my 6'4" neighbor just traded-in his clunker Caddy for one and I think it looks fantastic. The size, ground clearance and height are a homerun. The car also appears to give more bang for the buck than the Venza and the upcoming Accord Crosstour. The gas mileage ratings for the 4 cylinder are very competitive. I only wish Subaru would go back to offering FWD for those of us that see snow but once a year and even then, less than 3 inches. FWD would lower cost another $1,500 and maybe squeeze out 33 mpg. Nonetheless, I think the changes are great and overdue.

without the AWD you loose the uniqueness of the subaru and the superiority of it's AWD system. When you think of Subaru you automatically think AWD!

The acceleration numbers for this one are relative, because nowadays manufacturers handle power and gearing so they can get the effect they wish. I think in the 2.5i, Subaru wants fuel economy and reliability over speed. Actually, speed is not the top priority for an Outback owner. Just check them when you see one.

Now, if you want power, you go the Legacy Turbo. Last time I went for a revision in my Tribeca, I took the new Legacy Turbo test drive, and boy, it is a hoot to drive.

One of this days, Subaru is not going to be full AWD in America. The Toyosuba sports car is rwd, and the electric ones will be fwd, so they know is only a temporary thing. Anyway, in Minnesota, AWD rules.

I can't blame Subaru for going up a half size with the new Outback and Legacy. I love my Legacy GT Wagon but its smaller than other midsizers and gets cramped quickly once you start adding passengers, cargo, etc.

I do blame them for the styling on this Legacy though. I don't understand why they went with the butch styling. When other manufacturers are trying to make their SUVs and CUVs look less like trucks (Honda Pilot aside), Subaru is taking a car and making it look more like a truck. Initial sales may be good but I hope they're planning a less chunky looking refresh or they may end up out of step with the market.

As for earlier comments. Subaru has been on a role while other manufacturers are hurting. I think much of that has to do with its somewhat unique offering, relatively simple lineup and loyal customers. Each of these traits would be jeopardized if Subaru were to start trying to be all things to all people. They should continue to be a little quirky, very functional and all AWD. Any major deviations and they lose some appeal.

Nice car, lousy ROOF RACK! If you are an outdoor enthusiast and you want to kayak or canoe or put a heavy box on top then the factory roof rack will limit you activities and increase your risk of damaging your gear or vehicle. According to Subaru the roof is only rate to 100lbs and the bar 150lbs of dispersed weight. The bar spread is minimal at 30 inches so good luck trying to safely carry a couple of kayaks. After market systems would all have to be attached to the factory bars which are comprimised. The ROOF RACK is cute but a DESIGN FLAW