I wrote to Subaru discussing future direction today....

Tweaksta

Tweaksta

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2008
Messages
615
Location
McMahons Point, Sydney
Car Year
2000
Transmission
5MT
I wrote to Subaru to give them some feedback about where Subaru have been heading lately. Their reply is below my letter:

Dear Subaru Australia;

The main purpose of this email is to provide you with some feedback on
the directions Subaru have taken recently.

Firstly, let me say that at this point I never wish to drive another
brand of car. I love the Subaru "DNA" and this is what convinced me to
purchase my first Subaru Forester around 2006.

Of particular concern to me is the fact that if I were to buy a new
model, there would not be one to suit me any more. All newer models have
become too large and heavy to efficiently and economically transport me
around town.

My view is that more weight is not necessarily seen as progress in the
automotive world. I see real innovation as the ability to do more with
the same kerb weight as before (or even reducing weight whilst improving
the vehicle).

In addition to this, increasing engine capacity to 2.5L is also seen as
a hinderance to 'real' progress. Consideration should be given to those
who don't have a large family (2 kids or less) and those who use their
Subaru as their working vehicle during the week - ie: one person in the
car most of the time.

The first two models of Forester SF1 & SF2 were hugely successful due to
their simplicity and ruggedness with reasonable fuel economy and
prodigious handling (thanks to the Subaru DNA). The turbocharged GT
models were amazingly sporty on the road - yet they could outdo most of
the competition's soft-roaders (and even some serious 4x4s) in offroad
situations.

The SG XT was a good example of how improvements could be made without
sacrificing weight, however I don't believe it was necessary to go to a
2.5L engine.

I see a return to the 1200-1400kg range as well as a return to 2.0L
engines as a real step in the right direction. The 2.0L turbo engines
are legendary.

I hope these ideas and thoughts are useful to Subaru engineers /
designers and hopefully they can be used constructively to design
another groundbreaking vehicle that will change the world with the same
impact that the first Foresters did.

Thanks for listening!

Regards,
Tweaksta

-----------------------------

Dear Tweaksta,

Thank you for your email to Feedback at Subaru Australia.

We really appreciate the time that you have taken to write to us in
regards to the Forester range and our current range of vehicles. We are
delighted to hear you understand and love the Subaru DNA and
consequently bought your first Subaru Forester in 2006.

Your comments are very important to us and will allow us to indeed focus
on areas regarding our products that may require our attention in the
future or near future.

Your suggestions in regards to the weight and sizes of our vehicles in
general and our current engine line-up have been has been passed on to
our engineering department for their information and discussion with the
manufacturer in Japan.

Thank you again for your time and for providing us with your very
valuable feedback.

Kind Regards,

Gianni Carboni
Customer Relations
 
I like the letter you wrote. I completely agree with you. I might right a letter now :biggrin:
I think their should be the option of a 2.0 and 2.5 in both N/A and Turbo available and the desiel. The old rugged box shape has been with Subaru for their hole past until 2008 when their latest designs came out. They are just like another car now not the way they used to be, which I miss.
 
The Forester is currently the best selling car in its class, so they won't be changing direction with that car you'd think. But then they've been on winners before (1994-2000 WRX) and then went backwards in a major way with the 2001 model. With no offense to our US friends, Subaru are chasing that market and don't really care if it works or not in other markets. Look how long it took for a diesel engine to appear in order to to sell cars in Europe. Outside Switzerland, Subarus are very rare and hard to find, not having a diesel being a major reason why. So size and styling needs to appeal in the US market, as do costs. The irony is that people moved away from US cars because of better quality and efficiencies of Japanese cars, only to find that the Japanese are making their cars more American. In other words, despite what we want and what Subaru Australia says, if it affects the US market nothing will change
 
Quite happy with my 2.5NA and always have been, i was delighted when they went up the extra 500CC only to be disappointed with the lack of gains in the motor. Personally i would like a bigger Subaru with a nice grunty 3litre diesel with more offroad and towing capabilities (right up to 3tonne) and no i dont have kids in the car and yes its my daily driver.

I am heading off to live on the road in the next few years so obviously i will trading out of the Subaru for a bigger 4x4 so i have more space to have my gear.

Horses for courses but i dont see Subaru changing anything in the near future other than trying to get their car of the year status back using whats been tried and proven.

I personally am not a fan of the new line up preferring my 04 shape to the later one but again we all all have individual tastes and needs.

good luck but your peeing into the wind trying to get Subaru to listen, i have had alot of dealings with them in the past.

cheers
Tony
 
my04tone said:
Personally i would like a bigger Subaru with a nice grunty 3litre diesel with more offroad and towing capabilities (right up to 3tonne)
Click to expand...

+1 A 3litre Boxer Diesel engine or even 2.5l would be nice. Also if Subaru had a car bigger than the Tribeca but that looked decent.
For me the forester is a good size and even with the 2.0l engine their is enough power (a bit more pickup on the highway and more torque and grunt offroad would be nice) but I manage :biggrin:
 
Some of you are true off-road purists - after all this is Off Road Subarus.

I however place equal importance on the on-road behaviour of my car. On the bitumen my old 2.0 turbo Forester is able to out-corner and out-grip 2wd cars that are considered to be class leaders. On twisty mountain roads the Forester effortlessly outshines most cars except the best 2wds/4wds/AWDs without even trying.

Then, in off-road situations it is just as impressive - secure, sure-footed, predictable, comfortable and has a great feel.

Now, Subaru have just released this behemoth S-Edition....1600kg of it! With 193kw and a consumption figure of 13L/100km. That's close to 4L/100km more than mine. That equates to $60 more to drive to Brisbane or Melbourne (@ $1.50L x 1000km).

https://www.smh.com.au/drive/new-car-reviews/subaru-forester-sedition-20110224-1b6ci.html

I don't get the point of increasing engine capacity to increase power - only to kill it with weight. To me, this isn't progress. The Germans are right onto this "trying to make the next model lighter" way of thinking right now. Each subsequent release beats the previous one's figures.

What they did when going from SF to SG was spot-on. Massive improvement with same weight.
 
Not me- I still run road tyres. But I agree- 1600kg's is more than my old V8 Falcon. And that was all cast iron in the engine, gearbox and diff. The electric motors for the power windows were seriously heavy, and the panels were probably twice as thick. Where does all that lard come from? Weight is the enemy
 
Rally said:
The irony is that people moved away from US cars because of better quality and efficiencies of Japanese cars, only to find that the Japanese are making their cars more American. In other words, despite what we want and what Subaru Australia says, if it affects the US market nothing will change
Click to expand...

You nailed that one on the head Tony. (the same goes for out here even though the big 3's quality is on the rise again.) You can only get away with so much after making crap for 10yrs.
The 2.5L has always been the standard here since introduced in '98. Not sure why they would have the diff. engines for sep. markets. Mine has 154,000 miles & still runing very strong with no past issues.
 
I saw a thread a while back on SF.org about how the new line-up is going more mainstream with everything else. Getting away from their roots of what made them so successful. They hired a new guy to lead design / engineering, which everybody refered to as a "flying vagina". He mentioned that upsetting a "few subaru cult followers" would happen to make "progress" in the new markets. Or something along those lines...Can't remember what his name was since i havent been on there in so long.
 
I may stand corrected but as I understand it Subaru has pretty much flopped in Europe. I say that from my own observations of the place last year where outside Switzerland I barely saw one. They appear to be relatively successful in the USA, but I do not know about Canada. Not having been to those two countries I cannot say for sure. I saw lots in NZ and they seem to do relatively well here too. One can only guess at the engineering changes this bloke was talking about. In my mind, the engineering changes they need to consider are:
1) Improved transmission with 6 speed standard across the range
2) Improved engine efficiency- let's see how this new engine goes
3) Improved dynamics. They seemed to have lost their way here
4) Maybe not engineering, but better quality interiors
 
OK, then let's look at what the newest man through the revolving door says.



Osamu Namba, Subaru's new design chief wants to help move the company from a cult brand adored by outdoorsy types, Snowbelt buyers and performance enthusiasts into a mainstream brand capable of competing with offerings from major automakers.

"We want to broaden the appeal to make it accessible to more than a small, loyal crowd," Namba said in an interview with Automotive News.

Mr Namba intends to do this by selling fugly cars like the new Liberty. People like good looking cars. So make one.


According to Namba, form has traditionally followed function at Subaru, as their design was dictated by the low-mounted boxer engines, tall roofs (designed to help haul large items like bikes and other lifestyle gear) and sometimes outlandish wings and air scoops, necessitated by the rally-inspired performance items like big brakes and turbochargers.

So does that mean low mounted boxer engines are going- and if so, why? And why release 2 new engines?

Namba, who previously ran an independent design studio, was hired by Subaru after previous attempts at developing a unifying design language, faced a strong negative reaction from consumers. One review for the Subaru Tribeca famously called the new winged front fascia a "flying vagina".


Previously ran a design studio. Having seen his efforts, that studio would not have been on my shortlist.
Using the current Legacy and Outback as a template, future Subarus will be more accessible, but also bolder, with fewer soft curves and more muscular styling, eschewing the understated and functional designs of the past. "I don't want it to be just something serious and boring," Namba says. "A lot of people don't know that Subaru brand. If we can make styling more accessible, it will bring them in."

What a lot of rubbish. Strong negative reaction from customers. He says that as if it was a thing of the past. The Liberty is just horrible, it may be bold but only in an ugly sense and is certainly not in any way muscular. And what does "styling more accessible" mean?

There is no reason he cannot achieve what he wants. But he needs to forget about forging a brand look and instead concentrate on just making nice looking cars which are well engineered. As I have said countless times before, it costs no more to make a good looking car than an ugly one. The new small European Fords are nice, the Golf is alright, and most Jaguars and Aston Martins are brilliant. Fair dinkum, I just shake my head with this. It's not that hard
 
Totally agree Rally. Mind you ... perhaps I need to take another look at the Tribeca - others have obviously seen something in it that I missed!
 
Tweaksta said:
Now, Subaru have just released this behemoth S-Edition....1600kg of it! With 193kw and a consumption figure of 13L/100km. That's close to 4L/100km more than mine. That equates to $60 more to drive to Brisbane or Melbourne (@ $1.50L x 1000km).

https://www.smh.com.au/drive/new-car-reviews/subaru-forester-sedition-20110224-1b6ci.html
Click to expand...
Perhaps you need to check the official Subaru Australia website where it shows the S Edition as weighing 1585kg (XT Premium auto 1560kg, XS Premium auto 1520kg) with fuel consumption 10.5L/100km (same as the XT Premium auto, XS Premium auto 9.3L/100km). And dimensionally they are all the same size.

So the "behemoth" complaints you are making are a complete exaggeration using false information and really don't stand up to scrutiny.
 
I wont be buying another Subaru after this one as i have different needs now than i did back in 03, so Subaru can build what they want. Having said that i wont be changing cars until 2013, so by then i will have had 10 happy years in the car and hope to get just as much fun out of my next rig. I have nothing but praise for what my little car has done and where its been.
 
guzzla said:
Perhaps you need to check the official Subaru Australia website where it shows the S Edition as weighing 1585kg (XT Premium auto 1560kg, XS Premium auto 1520kg) with fuel consumption 10.5L/100km (same as the XT Premium auto, XS Premium auto 9.3L/100km). And dimensionally they are all the same size.

So the "behemoth" complaints you are making are a complete exaggeration using false information and really don't stand up to scrutiny.
Click to expand...

1585kg is not really much lighter than 1600kg is it now?

I did check the official stats but I rounded it up to 1600kg because it is so close - throw in your work bag and a few tools and you are over the 1600kg mark.

The real-world test figures from the SMH article found that the 10.5L/100km figure is quite hard to achieve. "On our test, fuel use was well beyond the claimed 10.5 litres per 100 kilometres, hovering closer to 13L/100km - it also requires premium unleaded."

The behemoth fact still stands I'm afraid.

This is my personal opinion - there is no right or wrong.
 
my04tone said:
I wont be buying another Subaru after this one as i have different needs now than i did back in 03, so Subaru can build what they want. Having said that i wont be changing cars until 2013, so by then i will have had 10 happy years in the car and hope to get just as much fun out of my next rig. I have nothing but praise for what my little car has done and where its been.
Click to expand...
So true Tony, the earlier Subis are great honest cars that really 'punch above their weight' - probably why so many Aussies love 'em!
 
I don't agree at all with the original letter - I come from a family whose first Subaru was a 4WD wagon in the seventies, and has owned Subarus consistently since then. My mum currently drives an Impreza wagon, dad drives a Liberty, brother drives an L series and I have a Forester.....we're all Subaru people.

If you dont' like the direction the Forester has taken, you can buy an Impreza or a Liberty or Outback.

The Forester has increased in size because the market demandsit - the current model Forester has sold better than any of its predecessors. It provides a "soft roader" alternative to a Liberty or Impreza wagon with more room, more clearance and more ability - exactly what it was designed for.

The 2.5 litre engine increased power from about 135hp to 170hp, and increased torque considerably as well. Yes, the weight has increased with the evolution of the model, but the answer isn't to keep the car small. If size and fuel economy are your priority you can buy a three door manual Getz that weighs as much as a can of dog food and does 28347 miles to the gallon for $13k. Go and get one of them. If you want a capable soft roader with an engine that can pull it along and have enough left over to tow something, that you can fit five people and luggage in, and drives better than any other soft roader, buy a Forester. If not, there are plently of other options.

When the Forester was built it was a quick fix for a growing softroader market - a fix that was to jack up an Impreza platform and drop a unibody box on top of it. The second generation was an evolution of this but it was still just another Impreza with a different name - same engine, same platform. The current generation gives the Forester it's own platform (of sorts), and the development it deserves as a high volume seller and a car capturing a large segment of the SUV/soft roader segment.

That's what they're catering for, and that's the direction they're going in. Not to create another Impreza with a lift.
 
Hi Beetle, and welcome to ORS
The Forester continues to be based on the Impreza. Check out the new rear suspension, and if that does not convince you, look at the dashboard. Bigger is not always better and can often be a hindrance. If you look across the Subaru range, they have lost their way in a number of areas. The styling of the cars- especially the Impreza and Liberty/Outback, is a good example. Prood of this is the number of styling changes being made to the Impreza. When the original Impreza came out, there was only one real change between 1993 and 2000- and that was relatively minor. In the next series, there were 2 major changes between 2001 and 2007. And even now- at least with the WRX, there has been one major change and the re-introduction of the sedan as well. With the WRX, they have softened the car, muscled it back up again- they have lost direction. With the STI, they are now offereing an auto option to appeal to Golf type customers, but with a low quality appearance interior.

Then there is the Liberty, which had appealed as a modern, classy looking car and is now- well, I don't know what is trying to achieve. The engines are less durable- especially the 2.5 litre in both turbo and non turbo forms. The STI tends to overheat if pushed- what happened to the engineering excellence that was Subaru?

So I think that when you look at what Subaru have traditionally stood for- solid engineering- and now they have loosened up on this, and continual changes in styling direction, and in their sporty cars continual changes in suspension tunes from one end to the other- then it would be fair to say that Subaru have lost direction. In doing so, they have in full knowledge alienated their traditional, loyal supporters to gain sales from swinging buyers. Maybe this is the only way for the brand to survive. But it does not alter the fact that while they may have hit it right sales wise with Forester, they have missed the mark totally with the Liberty. And only recently has the WRX started to sell again.

The only real issue I have with the Forester is that the interior in my opinion is more down market than my 7 year old Forester. Other Subaru's are no different in this regard. The WRX has certainly got better, but the 2.5 litre engine is simply not as durable as the 2.0 litre engine in my 1999 WRX. There are no other Subaru alternatives for these two models. Nor is there with the Liberty. My neighbour is in the market for a new car. On his short list are the Skoda, Honda Accord Euro and Mazda 6. The Liberty is not because he hates the look of it, but loves the previous model. He's not looking at another Subaru because he does not like the look of the Liberty. I tried to talk him into a WRX but he sees that car as a bit too extreme for him.

I've owned 3 Subarus- still own 2 of them. My dad has an 05 Liberty and my brother also had a WRX. When you look at these cars and the models that precede and followed them, and you look at the styling and engineering changes over time, the only conclusion I could draw is that Subaru have lost direction. I hope they find some good direction and keep to it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top