Subaru Needs A Bit Of A Makeover

New Project
ADVERTISEMENT

A wonderful Friday to you all and welcome back to another round of The Autopian’s daily news rodeo. Today we’re talking about Subaru, Tesla (again, sorry), Ford’s surprising AI plans, and the ways car dealers are fighting back against irrelevance in the digital era. It’s all going to be very exciting, of that I can assure you!

Subaru Gets A New Boss As The World Changes

2024 Subaru Crosstrek Rear

Let’s get this out of the way first: Subaru is hardly a brand in need of rescue. It’s been shockingly successful for such a tiny company over the past decade and change, offering reasonably priced, weather-capable options (and the occasional BRZ) that have resonated with countless families everywhere. In Brooklyn where I live, if you have kids, you are basically issued an Outback or a Crosstrek upon arrival. The only thing that’s really dampened Subaru’s momentum in the past few years has been the pandemic-related supply crunch.

But from a car reviewer’s perspective, doesn’t Subaru feel a bit… stagnant, in some ways? The last fully new-new car it came out with was the Ascent SUV and that was in 2018. The electric Solterra is… well, it could’ve been a lot better. The styling, tech experience and even performance of the rest of the lineup is just fine. Successful as it is, it feels like Subaru’s been resting on its laurels for more than a minute. [Editor’s Note: There are the “Wilderness” cars with tweaked exterior styling and increased ride height. Those were a smart move for Subaru, I think. -DT]. 

And then there’s the challenge of What’s Next—navigating the world of electric, connected and potentially autonomous vehicles. In many ways, Subaru’s trajectory mirrors that of its close partner and investor Toyota, as well as much of the rest of the Japanese auto industry. It hasn’t really taken the lead on the tech front, although you can kind of forgive Subaru for that because it’s so tiny. (Then again, by contrast, Mazda is also small and look what it’s up to these days.)

Anyway, like Toyota, Subaru’s about to get a new, slightly younger CEO and he–Atsushi Osaki—will be tasked with navigating the future challenges for the brand. Here’s Automotive News on what he wants to do next:

The next boss, speaking at a Friday press conference, said that flexibility and expansion will be key focal points of his tenure. Subaru will be flexible in quickly responding to market trends, such as electrification. And it will seek to grow in the U.S. and new markets such as Australia.

“We at Subaru want to survive the age of electrification by being nimble,” Osaki said. “We will put various systems in place while focusing on flexibility and expansion.”

The U.S., which constitutes Subaru’s biggest market by far, still holds lots of potential, he said.

“I believe we can still grow our sales in the U.S.,” Osaki said.

“We also receive a lot of customer inquiries from Japan, Asia, Australia, and Canada, as well,” he said. “At the moment, we are unable to meet such potential demand due to chip shortages, but we will work to resolve such issues and seek to further increase our sales globally.”

His tasks include future-of-cars stuff, improving quality, seeing what growth can still be squeezed out of Subaru’s giant U.S. market (especially with the Inflation Reduction Act incentivizing local EV development) and more. His predecessor Tomomi Nakamura was pretty aligned with Akio Toyoda on the EV front, but they’re all realizing that has to change:

Nakamura was known as an EV skeptic, often asking if demand was really that strong for EVs, especially in North America, Subaru’s most important market.

But last May, Subaru acknowledged increasing interest in the technology and announced plans to add a dedicated in-house EV assembly plant in Japan from about 2027. The push was part of a multibillion-dollar investment in electrification over the following five years.

Hopefully, Osaki can navigate all of this and inject a little freshness into Subaru as a brand in the U.S. Also, I sincerely hope cars like the WRX aren’t left to die on the vine in the EV era, but again, Subaru’s small and it can only do so much.

Tesla’s Investor Day Was Boring And Maybe That’s Fine?

Tesla Dump

I actually missed Tesla’s Investor Day presentation on Wednesday because I was flying back to New York from the Lexus RZ launch in San Diego (review coming soon!) The thing is, I didn’t actually miss anything at all. The big news was… a diner? Heat pumps? Probably the Mexico plan, that’s a major deal.

But what we didn’t get was news on major Autopilot updates, or the long-rumored new EV platform, or a plan for new model rollouts. As I’ve said countless times before, Tesla’s EV lineup is good—in many ways, still the best overall EVs you can buy right now—but it’s getting old and the competition is heating up quickly. Unveiling plans for a couple of brand-new crossovers, maybe one or two sedans, and something totally unexpected would’ve been a huge mic drop. No wonder investors didn’t really give a shit afterward.

But over at The Verge (which, full disclosure, is a publication I contribute to pretty regularly these days, although I was not involved with this one at all) Transpo Editor Andy Hawkins argues that the boringness actually wasn’t a big deal at all.

Why? Because it represented some degree of focus, which is notably absent from Elon Musk’s repertoire. And the eco-friendly message of it all represents Musk’s apparent thesis for the company’s future:

Look, saving the Earth rarely makes an exciting tech presentation. But Musk’s savior complex has taken a beating over the years. His bungled acquisition of Twitter has exposed his more reactionary tendencies, which has been a huge turnoff for some of his progressive-minded customers. The failed promises (“1 million robotaxis”) and delayed products (Cybertruck when?) have taken a toll on his reputation as an entrepreneurial visionary and all-around business genius. A 760mph hyperloop became a 50mph “Tesla in a tunnel.”

Maybe dialing back on the unfulfilled promises and focusing on the things you still need to accomplish is a good thing. Tesla’s previous Master Plans have been largely hit-or-miss. Part Deux, especially, remains broadly unfulfilled. And specifics of the third part of the plan still need to be fleshed out; Musk has promised a detailed white paper is forthcoming — but it seems to wisely steer clear of any benchmarks and deadlines that could be used to undermine Tesla’s credibility in the future.

Emphasis mine up there. It’s true that the easiest and most-used cudgel with which to hit Musk has been fact-checking his wild promises after deadlines pass. Remember how you were supposed to make $30,000 a year in passive income from deploying your Model 3 as a robo-taxi by 2019? Maybe Musk dialing that kind of thing back is a sign of growth.
At the same time, I wondered how much of the vague promises made at Investor Day were the result of a CEO (one who’s more deeply tied to his company than any other executive on earth) who is distracted with other matters right now. And I still think that unveiling a concrete roadmap for actual cars—you know, SUVs and sedans, not Cybertrucks—would’ve sent shockwaves through the rest of the auto industry.
But as ever, Tesla’s playing its own game here. It’s Elon’s world. We’re all just living in it.

Ford Isn’t Done With Self-Driving Cars

1 Qtfqveo6ycqd6nqk9cd Va
Photo: Ford

Speaking of false promises, 2022 was a crushing reality check of a year for autonomous cars. Arguably the highest-profile example was the death of Argo AI, which had investments from Ford and Volkswagen and seemed to be more legit than most of those startups. And on the consumer side, automated driving assistance programs continue to be plagued with problems and user mistrust.

But do not think that automakers are giving up here. Most of them see a day when cars will eventually become less human-driven, at least at the level they are now. It’ll just take longer than expected. So even as Ford wrote off its investment in Argo last year, it’s also launching its own in-house automated driving unit, Reuters reports. It’s called Latitude and it should have some familiar faces:
The Dearborn, Michigan-based automaker added it hired about 550 employees who previously worked at Argo AI for its new subsidiary.

Ford, which jointly ran Argo with Volkswagen AG, booked a $2.7 billion non-cash pre-tax impairment on its investment in the unit and laid off some employees.

Latitude, which will be led by Ford’s executive director of ADAS Technologies, Sammy Omari, is headquartered in Pittsburgh with additional engineering hubs in Dearborn, Michigan and Palo Alto, California.

Bringing this stuff inside the family and treating it more as a slow-burn development, rather than an overnight multibillion-dollar revolution in transportation, is probably the smart play here. But it’s further proof that autonomous cars aren’t going anywhere.

Dealer Fight

Honda Dealer Average New Vehicle Transaction Price
Photo credit: yonkershonda licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0

Finally, do not expect the car dealers to go gently into that good night. While there’s a version of the future where cars are bought online, need less maintenance thanks to OTA software updates, and can be repaired by remote mobile technicians, that’s not the most realistic approach—and the dealers are still deeply entrenched in the industry thanks to strong franchise laws.

Automotive News has a good overview of the state-by-state fight that’s brewing right now as traditional car dealers seek to protect themselves from a raft of changes.

Several state dealer associations are backing legislation to amend franchise laws that govern the relationship between dealerships and the automakers whose brands they sell. The issues run the spectrum.

Some states, such as Virginia, are proposing language that would prevent traditional automakers from negotiating the sale or lease of a new vehicle directly with consumers or declaring dealers to be delivery agents. Other states want to spell out dealers’ role in participating in future subscription revenue that automakers may seek to activate with over-the-air software updates. Proposals to remove automakers’ right of first refusal in buy-sell deals — the ability to assign an alternative buyer — also are on the table.

And the question of how much automakers should compensate dealers for performing warranty repairs — which has been percolating for years and bubbled over in December with a lawsuit Volkswagen brought in Illinois — is surfacing in bills to align reimbursement rates closer to what retail customers pay for service work.

Taken together, “I do think that the biggest focus this year will be on emphasizing the importance of the independence of dealer operations and avoiding unfair competition by an OEM with their franchised dealers,” said Shawn Mercer, a partner with Bass Sox Mercer in Raleigh, N.C., who represents dealers on franchise law issues.

Is it unfair competition, or just competition? Dealer political donations overwhelmingly lean Republican and conservative; and here I was, thinking that competition was a good thing. Anyway, that story’s worth a read in full. And today’s Associated Press dispatch from Mississippi certainly proves the point:

 The Mississippi Senate gave final approval Thursday to a bill to restrict electric car manufacturers from opening new brick-and-mortar dealerships in the state unless they comply with the same laws traditional carmakers follow.

[…] The bill does not restrict the direct sale of electric cars, as people can buy them online. But if they want to buy an electric car in person, they would have to drive to the state’s only Tesla store in Pearl, which would be allowed to remain open under the proposed new law. Tesla or any other electric car company could not open a new brick-and-mortar location to sell cars unless they enter a franchise agreement.

“You have to follow the same laws that everyone else has to follow,” one legislator said. Yes, the laws that the dealers lobbied for and helped write over many decades. Whenever someone tells you to follow the rules, remember whose rules they are.

[Editor’s Note: One thing I’ll just throw out there is that dealerships bring jobs, especially to rural communities. In my hometown of Leavenworth, Danny Zeck Ford was one of the biggest employers. Sure, there’s a “middle man” feeling to it all, but is it better for the world if the car company just pockets all the profit versus dealerships getting in on it? It may seem like it could be better for the consumer, in theory, but in practice? Also, having a local place to bring your car for service is obviously useful, and I could see “service only” locations being fewer and farther between than if there are dealers who also sell cars, though that’s admittedly unfounded. (Also, to be clear, our site’s main business partner sells cars, so I can’t be 100% disconnected from this topic, but I wanted to offer the other side of the coin to the “direct sales = way better” notion). -DT]

Back To You

Congratulations! You have actually defeated new Subaru chief executive Atsushi Osaki in an exhibition race at the All Japan Rally Championship. He was more than a worthy opponent, but at the end of the day, you just out-drove him. And according to the company’s peculiar bylaws, that means you are the new CEO of the Subaru Corporation.

It’s a weird rule, I know, but it keeps everybody honest.

Now that you’re in charge, what do you do with Subaru? Good luck! You got this. Probably.

Support our mission of championing car culture by becoming an Official Autopian Member.

Relatedbar

About the Author

View All My Posts

114 thoughts on “Subaru Needs A Bit Of A Makeover”

  1. Alright, I’m in charge of Subaru? New chief designer. Top priority.

    Yeah greenlight some more EVs, make a more hardcore WRX with a custom vape charger, expected car company things. But also someone that doesn’t make cars that look like the clay models fell down the stairs.

  2. Having a 2014 Forester with less than 70K on it that needed new bearings and bushings already, I finally understand how they can make such a ‘good’ product that is reasonably priced. Also the boxer is nice and torquey but the cvt just kills it. I know it helps with fuel economy but dang.

    That said, a majority of their cars get 30s on highway, so like Toyota/Honda they didn’t really NEED electric vehicles as much for cafe/carb credits to offset their giant suvs and trucks.

    I would lean on Toyota and try to get some decent hybrid technology, the RAV4 Prime is sold out everywhere and a big hit, need some of that Mojo for the Outback, like an Outback Charged or some such, let Toyota keep the busy forks ev to themselves.

    Maybe offer something with a canvas stop like the Wrangler Sky roof/Fiat convertible, make like a boxier Ascent with that, and a bigger tire packages and start collecting the monies.

    1. sadly pretty much everyone including Honda and Toyota have CVT or eCVT’s in just about everything. I am no fan, but I will say the fake shift points and longer experience with them on Subaru’s part makes them less heinous than the Nissan versions.

      1. Counterpoint: fake shift points in CVTs make them more heinous. You lose the benefit of always being at the right point in the power band but keep the fragile mechanisms and dubious response characteristics. The only reason anyone wants fake shift points is because it’s what they’re used to, not because it’s better.

  3. Like others have noted, Subaru excels at being decent. And I say that as a fan, my family and family members have owned multiple, everyone loves them, but none of them are exceptional at anything. Toyota gets blasted a lot for making appliances but they also did (kind of) make the Supra, 86 and the GR cars.. Subaru did what? Added some cladding to the WRX and got rid of manuals in the lower tiers?

    Personally, I feel that with the consistent sales and revenue from the pedestrian level cars, Subaru needs to do a proper hardcore rework on the WRX. There needs to be a proper enthusiast car, not just another ‘oh yeah, we sell these too!’

  4. I like the look of the Subaru’s I see. The sound? Not so much. The ones I’ve heard all sound like they’re powered by a washing machine filled with loose nuts & bolts.

  6. 1) BRING BACK THE FUCKING WRX HATCH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    2) Bring back the Baja in 4 and 2 door configurations
    3) Crosstrek Wilderness, XT, and WRX trims
    4) Wilderness and XT trims for the Outback, Forester, Ascent, and revived Baja
    5) Just when you think it can’t end, Wilderness trims for the BRZ and WRX for a rally fighter vibe
    6) Make the BRZ a fucking hatchback already
    7) Give the BRZ t-tops too damnit
    8) And just in case you thought I forgot, give that BRZ an optional turbo
    9) Make the Levorg STi that Might Car Mods have proven Subaru could make today.
    10) Rebrand and cross-sell the GR Corolla so we don’t have to deal with Toyota dealerships to buy one
    11) BRING BACK THE FUCKING WRX HATCH ALREADY!!!!!! GEEZ, HOW MANY TIMES DO WE HAVE TO ASK?!?!?!?

    1. Give the BRZ a Turbo with 300+ HP and call it the WRX, then if it fits add AWD and perhaps an electric motor for the front wheels to total 450HP with 40 miles of Plug in hybrid driving each day when just commuting.

      They also need to offer this system in all of the SUV’s they make. call them all STi’s if that makes you happy

      1. The AWD really won’t fit in the BRZ. For the original BRZ/FR-S several modifications were made to the Impreza platform to move the engine down and back to lower the center of gravity. According to the Subaru engineer that was their entire goal because the aftermarket can add more power but only the OEM can achieve the low CoG during the design process. I realize that my demands for T-tops and a rear hatch will raise that CoG a bit but I can’t fit anything in this tiny trunk opening!!!

  7. I’d find the old tooling (now where did I leave that?) to bring back the Loyale and the Brat, codify their production requirement, then resign.

    1. Considering the Maverick and Brat made the Party in the front/ Business in the back ElCamino design desirable again, I would say a Brat or even the Baja could be welcomed back pretty easily. certainly if they could do a version of the wilderness with a hybrid plug in hybrid drive out back and FWD on gas, for under 30K, that would really be something I believe.

  8. As Subaru CEO, we will go back to our BRAT roots and make a unibody truck to compete in that burgeoning market. Toss it on the Outback platform, which already has a stout tow rating for its class, bring the manual transmission back for enthusiasts and print money.

  9. I will bring back the Baja and never, ever let it go out of production again, thus triggering a complete paradigm shift in the US auto industry towards utes. I will be hailed as the smartest man who ever lived, the champagne of beers will rain from the heavens, and women will throw themselves at me. All because I gave the people what they really want: cars with boxes

    1. I didnt think Subaru women through themselves at men? JK

      HEY how about Suburu minivan? That is all anyone needs and everyone needs one.

  10. Subaru? Let’s get wild.

    Crosstalk? More like Cross-trx. More power, a lift, and Aztec style tent.

    Ascent? Turbo engine. Bring back the H-6 and turbo it. Ascent STI. Bring it, explorer ST.

    Legacy wagon. Brown and a stick.

    Electric options for all

    A new BRAT. Base it on the cross-trx. Removable top, reversible back seat for retro goodness. Make a low range transfer case an option, and it’s like a modern tracker.

    Big Bratty Baby. Do the above to the ascent STI and make a bronco competitor. Or a murano cabriolet of the new decade.

    Electrify the BRZ. Bonus points if you add a targa top and beat tesla to the punch(not that that is hard).

  11. I can’t think of anything really “new” Subaru has done in powertrains here for years for that matter. The 2.4T is all, and that was more to replace the old H6/5AT combo. They’ve resisted other small displacement turbo 4s here. What’s next?

    It’s similar to Mazda just rocking the 2.5 & 2.5T here; both companies are rather similar in that they haven’t really jumped on any hybridization here, but also partnered with Toyota in some way – supposedly the CX-50 using Toyota hybrid tech is in the works, Subaru should do the same for some model(s) especially now that Honda is leaning heavier into hybrids.

    Perhaps Subaru felt scorned by the performance of the original Crosstrek hybrid, but the gains there were pretty slim IIRC. By now, I would think the sharp rise in RAV4 Hybrid sales during its current generation should be a sign that consumers are shifting to some form of electrification.

    1. Also, personally, I’d throw a more fun manual shift everyday model out there, something that’s an alternative to the Civic/Mazda 3 without going harder edged sport variant. I’d buy a Crosstrek Sport 6MT. (With a moonroof, which you couldn’t get on a Crosstrek manual before.)

      Online sales and DTC are one thing, but with the way the model is now and has been, I don’t think the manufacturers really want to deal with being their own dealers. They just want to make the cars, get them distributed, and then it’s on the dealers to get them out there. They don’t want to deal with your trade, they don’t want to deal with tax/title laws in 50 states. Dealers suck, but pessimistically I can’t help but think subbing the dealer for the big corporation could just change one problem for another.

  12. First – Hey Automotive News, I’d love to write my Virginia elected official opposing anything that helps maintain the dealer cartel, but I can’t find what bill your article is referring to. In part that is due to a lack of coverage by other outlets, the terrible website the VA legislature has for legislation, but also your pay wall blocks the most pertinent info.

    Second – I’m not sure I’d criticize a car company for following Toyota, the current best selling manufacturer in the world. Seems like it has worked out OK for Toyota so far.

    With that said, I do think Subaru needs to step up. I’d buy another Subaru but I don’t want a 20-something mpg 4-cylinder. They should have a hybrid on every model. Maybe even the WRX. A 40+ mpg Outback would sell like crazy.

  13. If I were in charge of Subaru, my first move would be to develop a mini-van. I think that the brand has lost some of the quirk that made it popular in the first place. There’s a good chance 10 years from now your typical Subaru buyer has little loyalty for the brand as it becomes increasingly obvious that a Rav4 can be had for the same cash and will likely last far longer.

    In a world of van-life and the brand’s focus on outdoor stuff, why not a van body on the Ascent platform?

    To be clear, I’m not here to run the company to make money in this case. I’m just here because I want a Subaru van.

    1. All the fanboys have been like “the WRX will grow on you don’t worry” but I’ve seen a good 7-8 of them in person now and I hate them as much as ever. It’s just a disorganized mess of a design that can’t decide what it is. Sedan? Hatchback? Crossover? How about a little of all with none of the benefits of any design or usefulness wise?

      I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: Subaru is intentionally making a bad WRX so they have an excuse to kill it off in a few years

  15. :if demand was really that strong for EVs, especially in North America” is a valid question. EV sales are very small right now. so the volume does not really indicate the actual demand. The Greenies have managed to push the agenda far enough that the products are only slightly less useful than a standard ICE car. and hopefully since the car companies have fully drank the Koolaid and are hell bent on going to very heavy, very expensive, not all that reliable long term Electric vehicles. We may never really know he real demand. Also after a few cycles of new cars and the secondary market starts affecting the choices of the primary market, that demand may actually go down. but by that time we will not have a lot of alternate choices I believe. Now the righties are also doing a fair job of spreading doom and gloom when noting thing s like parked cars catching fire, Battery costs for replacement and massive range drop when used in really hot or really cold weather, so that also affects demand.

    It would be interesting to see the poll on this here.

    Does this crowd really want to buy a BEV right now? Or do they plan to ride it out until the end of the gasoline station on every corner.

    I personally only want one type of EV right now, and that is the 4Xe in a wrangler. But I definitely don’t want that more than say a 392 wrangler, or even just a reliable 3.6 Rubicon.

    2. My wife and I own one BEV and one gas powered Grand Cherokee. When it’s time to replace the 10 year old Jeep, it will probably be with a BEV. The only exception is if the 4Xe option on a Grand Cherokee comes down in price.

    3. My next car–coming soon due to an expiring lease on an Alfa that I have no intention of purchasing–is going to have a stick shift and too much power, probably in the form of a V8, because I want these things while they are still available. I have driven a Tesla, and it was fine–the driving dynamics were pretty good, but f$%^ not having a dash board and buttons, and it was plagued by the same squeaks and rattles that have me questioning the build quality on my Alfa. I am, in theory, okay with the idea of having BEV, but I think they are currently about as ready for mass adoption as I am for owning one (not very). That’s admittedly a very enthusiast POV, but until prices drop dramatically and charging infrastructure/capacity improves dramatically I don’t think normies are going to particularly anxious to jump on the BEV train either.

    5. Every single EV available for sale here is being sold fairly quickly. Sales are a small percentage because there are production constraints on every single EV. Tesla M3 outsells the BMW 3 Series. And Model Y sales are pretty brisk too. The Bolt and EUV are a hit for GM. Same with the Model E and Lightning for Ford. VW is quietly selling a ton of ID4’s and has lots of interest for the Buzz. The near term looks to be more production constraints limiting sales instead of no demand.

  16. I agree with David that the Wilderness editions were an excellent move by Subaru. I have been seeing a bunch of those on the road and none at dealers, so I think they sell super fast. They are exactly the sort of thing Subaru buyers want–a little more capability and clear visual indication of increased capability.

    Kia is doing the same sort of thing with X-Line and X-Pro models, and TRD Toyotas have been massive sellers for a long time. Even if you never use the increased capability, there is a certain appeal to the appearance of it, plus a little higher ride height is a popular choice on its own.

    As the new Subaru CEO, I’d probably add another level slotted in above the Wilderness on some models, a Wilderness model on the rest of the SUV-adjacent vehicles, and start offering XT models of the Forester and Crosstrek. Maybe Wilderness Impreza and Legacy, too.

    1. After that, I would get to work offering the hybrid on all models, more electrics, and more transmission options on the non-EVs. Even if we don’t go manual, a good auto is probably going to be popular among CVT critics. Probably with a non-paddle manumatic mode.

      1. *raises hand*

        I’m really fond of a good modern automatic or a DCT and having a good auto is a requirement for my daily

        *gets hit in the nuts by flying Autopian grille badge*

        1. I’m with you. I can’t shift as well as a good modern auto, and I would rather daily an automatic anyway.

          The DCT in my Niro is actually pretty good for what an economy car it is. My Civic was faster, but the CVT just didn’t do it for me.

          1. I live in DC and commute north and south three days a week, two of which are during rush hour. On a perfect day during my later shift (11-7) when I interpret speed limits as vague suggestions I can pull it off in 20-25 minutes. On the absolute worst of days when I have rush hour plus some sort of issue along the way (accident, construction, motorcade, etc) it can easily take an hour or more.

            And unfortunately even weekend driving turns into gridlock a good chunk of the time. I like driving stick and am decent but not amazing at it. It just isn’t worth it to put up with the extra headache through all that damn traffic when just keeping my cool in an automatic car is annoying enough as is.

            I like DCTs in my dailies because they can handle traffic but don’t sacrifice any performance…hell in almost all applications they improve it. I just prefer that they actually let you take full control when you want it. My GTI didn’t and it drove me up walls because I’d put it in manual mode and it would still auto short shift me every time.

            Fortunately my Kona N only auto up shifts out of first. Other than that it gives you full reign to be an absolute monkey with the transmission. I smash it off redline all the time. It’s great, it has a hard limiter and you can literally feel it through the chassis…plus with the valves open on the exhaust it literally sounds like a machine gun. Whenever I’m on my spirited drives that are of course always within the confines of the law I usually keep it in manual mode.

            It’s not as engaging as driving a full stick but it’s not all that far off. It’s a good compromise for my needs. That being said I’ve driven a few cars with the ZF8 and I do like that transmission as well…although I’d still prefer a good mechanical feeling DCT.

            1. That all feels pretty similar to my thoughts on the matter. A stick is good fun when you can use it, but an auto is simple in traffic. And the DCT in the Niro lets me do things that a CVT with paddle “shifters” simply can’t.

              If I had the space, I’d probably add a manual to my garage, but I don’t, so I appreciate my DCT. Even if it is on a pretty underpowered vehicle.

        2. The ZF 8 speed that everyone uses is a fantastic slushbox automatic. It’ll change gears almost as fast as a DCT and quite violently when programmed to do so. Yet in traffic it’s fine idling along imperceptibly shifting. If I ever wanted a sporty car with an auto, it would have one of those ZF 8 speeds in it.

          Shoutout also to the U760/770 in all the RAV4’s out there. Another great transmission that will happily bang off redline and is hard to catch flat-footed.

    2. Toyota also has the Woodland edition on some like the Sienna and RAV4 Hybrid, Hyundai has the XRT models, Honda is beefing up the Trailsport variants. Definitely was a good move by Subaru.

    3. Which letters are still available for the ‘upgrade’ models? AMG, M, TRD, N, R, S, GTI, X, E-type, F-type, MOPAR, and probably many others I don’t even know. So Subaru? B? U?
      At the Chicago show they had their National Park display, which was very cool. So I say go NP and hammer the van life, off road, 4WD, Backroads, Active Lifestyle market with upscaled version of everything they now offer. A beefy off-road Ascent would sell out in a few minutes, especially if it cam with a kitchen. 3 out of 4 of my kids are Subaru-ties. They wouldn’t even consider a different brand. So Subaru push above your weight class and I will buy your stock, not your cars though.

  17. We bought a Subaru Crosstrek with the 2.5 liter option. Its fine. Perfectly fine. Is it super exciting? Is it super fast? Is it great on fuel economy? No. Its about average in those regards.

    But what it does do well at is actually going off roading, which we use it for fairly regularly. Its amazing how well the thing doesn’t slip very easily. The suspension and traction control system are really well thought out. The interior and really, the rest of the car is cleverly done. Like there is a light that is positioned perfectly to light up the trunk area. Little stuff like that.

    Its a good, solid, utilitarian, non-fussy car.

  18. If dealerships didn’t absolutely suck we might not even be having this discussion. At the end of the day their business model is ripping off consumers as much as possible. The reason why so many folks want direct sales instead is that people are having much better experiences buying that way…and they aren’t beholden to scumbag dealerships deciding to slap ludicrous markups on popular cars just because they can, playing mind games, bullying customers into making bad financial decisions, etc.

    It’s also important to note that manufacturers can do very little about dealerships choosing to be scummy. All in all it’s a situation that’s bad for literally everyone except the folks who own the dealerships, who continue to pocket money at a ridiculous pace, and the politicians they pass that money to. And hey, isn’t this like…supposed to be how to do capitalism? Let various models compete and let the market decide? Well the market is loudly asking for more direct sales.

    Dealerships could, you know…deliver a product that sucks less ass, but instead they’re crying to the government for handouts and asking them to rig the game in their favor more. How very Republican of them…handouts for me, not for thee. I’m not exactly a raging anti capitalist or anything but what I am firmly against is crony capitalism that rigs the game in favor of who has the deepest pockets/most friends in high places. And boy does the US of A have that down pat!

    Anyway my plan for Subaru is simple and not at all a shitpost, allow me to lay it out:

    1). First order of business is I’m finding a transmission partner who can supply decent goddamn automatics for the entire lineup. Every single CVT is then getting fired into the sun.

    2). We’re bringing back the STI…but in order to get one you have to sign a no vaping contract.

    3). Crosstrek WRX.

    4). We’re mounting the GR Corolla powertrain longitudinally in the GR86/BRZ.

    5). Hybrid powertrains for all the commuters

    6). Electrify

    …I’m expecting my check by COB today.

      2. Wow. I’d be annoyed if someone told me I had to change transmission fluid every 15k miles. Having to change transmissions that often is nuts!

    2. Ooh, point 3 is one I had forgotten they haven’t done. There SHOULD be a Crosstrek WRX already.

      And I had not even thought about 4. That would be great.

  19. First thing I do is Crostrec WRX with the manual available. Give the regular WRX with the manual the better seats and equipment from the CVT. Save money by getting rid of the stupid Partial Zero Emissions Vehicle badges on every car. Come out with hybrid Accents and Foresters using the battery technology from big daddy Toyota’s Prius

    1. A fast Crosstrek would print money. I would also like to see the regular WRX become a hatchback again, or at least have the option.
      The CVT’s need to be removed from any performance Subie. They have no business being there.

  20. First of all you spoke ill of Tesla? I here the Teslastands gathering with pitchforks and torches ready to march. 🙂

    As far a Subaru, my main feeling is bring in more manuals. This brand has always been about capable vehicles for how most people use 4WD/AWD. It is not a deep woods option, bad weather, snow covered roads, etc are where it lives. Manuals and Subarus just go together.

    Other way to move forward, have a let the engineer’s go crazy line, look into EVs as the size it right, offer comfort, basic utility, medium ground. If they can make a 3 pedal EV, even better. More WRX like products would be nice as well.

  21. I wish only the best for Subaru and the next generation of products.

    Now that I’m finally maturing, I’m looking at something like an Outback or Ascent, but its got’ta have some guts. At the same time, some level of efficiency.

    My WRX had both and was a hoot to own, but time marched on for me (and my back). The WRX also had that something special in that it wasn’t fancy, but it was well made and did the basics oh so well. Things just worked on it like they were not designed to meet the minimums. E.gs. : Windows went up and down without sounding strained. Dashboard didn’t rattle. Plastic bits didn’t warp. Headlights actually put out usable light. Wasn’t onerous to work on. Wasn’t perfect. Once the factory audio system was gutted and replaced with a modest (IMO) system, I didn’t find myself wanting to change it too much. Just thoughtful and well thought out tweeks.

    2. That’s my current daily. It’s a car that cars very well for my needs. I haven’t found a compelling replacement yet so on it drives.

    1. I’d like it if we could maybe turn it off for members? If we’re paying money to support the site we’re pretty unlikely to be spamming….

    2. I had a lot getting caught, but it seemed consistently in the thread on people being upside down on their cars and I assume it was because a lot of the subject matter for ‘loans’ and ‘banks’ matched some of the phrasing all the bots who are making working from home full time for your friendly major tech org use.

      2. I had some there too, but also on this article, where I dared to speak semi-positively about car dealers. Perhaps that blasphemy is the reason for my comment’s banishment.

  23. “Also, having a local place to bring your car for service is great. -DT”

    You don’t need a dealership for that. You need a mechanic. There’s no reason why today’s dealers can’t transform into tomorrow’s manufacturer-licensed service centers. Most dealerships operate their sales and service departments as almost entirely separate entities already.

    2. A good point, there are definitely ways to get around that. Obviously, you’d want the mechanics trained by the OEM, and for them to have the diagnostic tools, but that can still happen without an attached dealership.

      1. And the dealership model could transition to being more of a showroom and service center. I’d rather go and test drive some stuff, order a vehicle, and get it serviced. The worst parts of a dealership (sales pressure, inventory control, etc.) don’t need to be there for it to work, though you almost have to go away from independent dealerships to ensure you get there. That middleman between the buyer and the manufacturer has to make money, so they’re gonna do what they can to maximize that.

    3. A good mechanic is hard to find. More often than not, I’ve had good repairs at a stealership.

      I got a good local mechanic for when I have older vehicles and a good dealership for my newer car repairs.

      That being said, one of my 6 year old SUV is sitting at the dealer for almost 3 months now waiting on a backordered part that only the manufacturer supplies. The good part is that I’ve been driving new loaners. Though the repair will be expensive, I’m coming out ahead since I’m not in a rental or having to buy a used car to fill in my transportation needs.

    4. Right on. As I understand it, the profit margins on non-luxury (and non-Tesla) sales are very low anyway. Most of the dealership profits come in by way of the service centers. Transitioning to be a service center only, with the hook of having manufacturer-trained mechanics and an oem parts supply chain would still bring in plenty of business. I hate the dealership experience with a white hot passion, but I frequently use the dealership service departments and have always had good experiences with them.

    5. Today’s dealers would close their service department tomorrow if they could. They only keep them open because they have to. The service department is an extremely capital-intensive part of the business that doesn’t make them much money compared to their sales and leasing.

      So… there is a very good reason. Not to say that they couldn’t do it, but just that they would probably take their money and invest it in a business that will make them more money. Unless the manufacturer would subsidize them.

      2. That’s totally backwards from everything I’ve heard about dealers. That sales of new vehicles makes a small profit, used vehicles makes a little more profit, and the profit center is the service department.

        Maybe some ultra luxury brands are different.

  24. No one likes me to keep saying this, but car dealers provided value to me, personally, almost every time I’ve bought a vehicle.

    Example:

    When I went to order my Ford truck, I sent emails and/or visited several local dealerships giving them the specs on my order and asking for a quote. The truck is identical no matter who orders it for me and I don’t use the dealer for service, so it’s purely a pricing game. By playing dealers off each other, I ended up with a lower price.

    Now, you could argue that without the middleman, Ford would have directly given me the same lower price or better. But what incentive do they have to do that? All of a sudden, I’m going from 20 unique entities competing for my business to one. You could argue that I could have bought from GM or Ram instead. Even if I wanted to do that (I didn’t), that’s still only 3 competitors instead of all their dealers.

    I’m all in favor of allowing manufacturers to compete with dealers. I don’t think there’s any justification for the restrictive laws that some states have. I’m not at all moved by the argument that dealers provide local employment. I’m just opposed to the magical thinking that “eliminating the middleman” automatically leads to better results for consumers. It more likely just leads to a different corporation profiting off you.

    1. I don’t mind dealers, and I can see some of the value they provide. What I don’t like is the party of small government working to mandate that companies go through dealers. I think that manufacturers should have the choice to go through dealers or not. Big companies like Ford and GM can see some value as they do not have to purchase real estate, hire sales and service staff, etc. They can build the cars and let others sell them. For smaller manufacturers, there may be an advantage to direct sales such as lower transaction price to get consumers in the door. Once they become established, they can spin off the sales division to franchisees.

Leave a Reply