Any reason to not consider a 2008 Subaru Tribeca?

[mvbighead]

Wife and I are looking to update our winter vehicle and her daily driver, a 2005 Chevy Equinox AWD. The AWD in that is a bit wimpy, and I would like to have a DD that was a bit more capable especially in the winter as we live in the country with a pretty steep hill that can be quite slick from time to time (the Equinox does ok there, but could do better). Further, I want the family vehicle to be the preferred vehicle for family trips (dual climate zones, heated seats, newer looking, etc.).

Also, the interior of the Equinox is very dated, and the steering is terrible. The turn radius would lead you to believe you were driving a semi, and it usually takes putting the car into reverse at least once to park in a standard parking lot.

So, all that aside, after some reading on the Subaru AWD system, I was ready to take the plunge. Wife doesn't seem to like the wagon look of the Outback, and I can't find a Forester with a new body style that fits our budget and feature checklist. Insert two options at Tribeca. Current front runner is at 15K with under 70k miles. MPG looks to be a bit worse than the Equinox, but I suspect it'll be at most a difference of 1-2 MPG, and could even come out about even as we've never gotten much better than 20MPG with it.

Any reason to not consider a 2008 Tribeca (Limited)?

 

[monkeydelmagico]

Ahhhaa the flying vag. It'll be a classic someday. Yes you really should get that for your wife just don't tell her the nickname.

 

[mvbighead]

So, Forester would be the better option?

I see the 2006 'B6' model being hideous, but there is a lot of love lost on the newer models for not being as unique.

I guess i see the MPG dropping a good deal from the Forester there, but the horse power goes up considerably. Hmmmm... trying to see, from a maintenance/comfort/whatever level, what make the Tribeca a bad buy or the Forester a better one.

 

[NutBucket]

I don't know of any major issues. The 3.0 is considered by the mags to be slightly underpowered...I don't recall when they put in the bigger motor. Transmission seems to be OK. I know of people grenading them in turbo Legacys but only after adding major power.

 

[monkeydelmagico]

True, by 2008 they had cleaned up the grill and erased all traces of the aforementioned pundis. Tribeca was suby attempt to go upscale. It's going to be larger, tech laden, and more thirsty. If you can get one for around the same prices as similar year/mileage forresters then I'd think its a hidden gem.

 

[mvbighead]

I don't know of any major issues. The 3.0 is considered by the mags to be slightly underpowered...I don't recall when they put in the bigger motor. Transmission seems to be OK. I know of people grenading them in turbo Legacys but only after adding major power.

The Tribecas I have seen have a 3.6. Supposedly a 250+ HP motor, which is more than I have in my 2007 3.9 Impala, which is enough for me (needing enough power to pass someone going 5-10 under on highway/freeway, etc).

 

[mvbighead]

One last item of note, the Forester's (in the price range I am looking for) do not have dual climate zones. As I run hot and my wife runs cold, this is something I am making mandatory for this purchase, as that is a drawback we have in our Equinox that we don't have in the Impala.

EDIT: One last item to note, if it weren't for the AWD system, I might have already been looking elsewhere. But, I've had times where my drive way has a fair amount of snow and I don't have time to deal with it. The equinox got stuck, my 2000 Silverado drove right out. I'd like to think the more capable awd system in teh subaru would push right on through without an issue. Based on the hill climb test where various models are compared to subaru, this is why my push is to go for subaru. As long as the 3.6 in the Tribeca is dependable, i could see having one of these in the garage.

Here is one of the options we are considering:
http://www.autotrader.com/cars-for-...BECA%7CLimited]][]]&listingId=357629578&Log=0

 

[NutBucket]

Ah, OK. Then that shouldn't be a problem. So as I said, I don't recall any major issues. Just don't expect the 3rd row to be very useful.

I didn't even remember the Forester offering dual zone. A few of ours cars have had it...just never used it as designed! However my wife does love heated seats.

 

[mvbighead]

Ah, OK. Then that shouldn't be a problem. So as I said, I don't recall any major issues. Just don't expect the 3rd row to be very useful.

I didn't even remember the Forester offering dual zone. A few of ours cars have had it...just never used it as designed! However my wife does love heated seats.

Yeah, we thought about the third row. Not all have them, but it isn't a point of need for us (IE - If it has it, great, if not, oh well.)

I am beginning to think the Forester in that year did not have that option. I think some LL Bean editions did, but that seems to be older models. And yes, the wife LOVEs the heated seat.

To be honest, my biggest drive is having a nicer car than I drive to work for our family trips. That, and putting the wife in a nicer car. The Equinox has (p)leather seats, without heat, and the interior just looks and feels cheap. I am not seeing that in the Tribeca, but we have yet to sit in one. I find it hard to believe we'd like it less than the Equinox, and the interior is reminiscent of my wife's Solara, which she loved. Seems we'll likely push forward on the Tribeca, as the Forester doesn't have the dual climate option.

 

[soulcougher73]

I hated the Tribeca i looked at before buying a Forester. Couldnt move the back seats back far enough to get in. Im only 6'0". Im not tall giant. Felt small inside to me.

 

[mvbighead]

I hated the Tribeca i looked at before buying a Forester. Couldnt move the back seats back far enough to get in. Im only 6'0". Im not tall giant. Felt small inside to me.

Ruh roh. That may suck for me at 6-3. Considering 99% of the time I'll be in the driver seat or front passenger seat, that may or may not be an issue, but climbing in to strap the kiddo into the car seat may have new challenges.

 

[Zargon]

EDIT: One last item to note, if it weren't for the AWD system, I might have already been looking elsewhere. But, I've had times where my drive way has a fair amount of snow and I don't have time to deal with it. The equinox got stuck, my 2000 Silverado drove right out. I'd like to think the more capable awd system in teh subaru would push right on through without an issue. Based on the hill climb test where various models are compared to subaru, this is why my push is to go for subaru. As long as the 3.6 in the Tribeca is dependable, i could see having one of these in the garage.

you are probably running garbage ass tires on the equinox? tires are far far more important than AWD

 

[mvbighead]

you are probably running garbage ass tires on the equinox, tires are far far more important than AWD

I run garbage ass tires on the silverado (whatever it had when I bought it), and when I put it in 4wd, I never have an issue.

I've heard this a lot from AWD naysayers. The fact is, when the wheel without traction is spinning whilst wheels with possible traction are just sitting there, you don't have a tire issue. I am looking for an AWD system that actually puts power to the necessary wheels, or rather, can put power to the necessary wheels.

I have had "garbage" tires on the following vehicles and never had an issue with snow due to capable AWD/4WD systems:
92 Jeep Cherokee
00 Jeep Grand Cherokee
00 Chevy Silverado

When I am stuck and I have wheels just sitting there, I tend to think that the tires aren't the issue because an idle tire is not attempting to move me forward. Especially when I am stuck on a road, and not a field or severely bad terrain (mud/ice/etc).

So, in short, i disagree with the assumption that "garbage ass" tires are the problem. When I don't have issues stopping, but I have certain issues with traction getting moving, I will tend to suspect that the AWD system is at fault, especially when a number of other AWD systems move along just fine.

And, just so it's known, the Silverado is running cheap walmart highway tires, not any sort of knobby off road jobs.

 

[mvbighead]

Just for reference:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0_MXK2nzt2Y

This ain't the roller video, just a steep hill with rock. I don't suspect either vehicle is running garbage ass tires, or world beaters either for that matter.

 

[mvbighead]

Trying to lay out options as we are planning on doing serious looking and potentially buying on Saturday.

Any reason to not consider the Ford Edge? Seems to have all the features we're looking for, but I dunno if it'll have a more capable AWD system than our existing Equinox. I suspect it won't best the Subaru.

 

[mvbighead]

Crap, realized that was also in the AWD video, and it didn't do well. Maybe Jeeps I suppose, but the closer I get to liking something about a particular car, the more I find I don't like. Looks like my options are between a Forester sans dual climate zones (none seem to have it), or a Tribeca with slightly worse MPG.

 

[hanoverphist]

ihave a couple old subarus, love them. my mom has the ford edge, decent travel vehicle but i dont really like that it is dead weight if the battery dies. cant even put it in neutral to roll it off the road or away from the garage wall to get at the hood to charge/ jump it. hers has never seen dirt.

 

[Zargon]

I run garbage ass tires on the silverado (whatever it had when I bought it), and when I put it in 4wd, I never have an issue.

I've heard this a lot from AWD naysayers. The fact is, when the wheel without traction is spinning whilst wheels with possible traction are just sitting there, you don't have a tire issue. I am looking for an AWD system that actually puts power to the necessary wheels, or rather, can put power to the necessary wheels.

I have had "garbage" tires on the following vehicles and never had an issue with snow due to capable AWD/4WD systems:
92 Jeep Cherokee
00 Jeep Grand Cherokee
00 Chevy Silverado

When I am stuck and I have wheels just sitting there, I tend to think that the tires aren't the issue because an idle tire is not attempting to move me forward. Especially when I am stuck on a road, and not a field or severely bad terrain (mud/ice/etc).

So, in short, i disagree with the assumption that "garbage ass" tires are the problem. When I don't have issues stopping, but I have certain issues with traction getting moving, I will tend to suspect that the AWD system is at fault, especially when a number of other AWD systems move along just fine.

And, just so it's known, the Silverado is running cheap walmart highway tires, not any sort of knobby off road jobs.

I'm not an AWD naysayer, I drive a 4x4. does your silverado have a locker in the rear?

it could also be the ABS controlled traction control causing issues, going OMG tires are moving at differnet speeds so we should slow them all down!!!

i hate that.

tires fix alot of these issues

are you saying you cant get started but you can apply moderate braking and stop fine w/o traction issues?


it sounds like the nice 4wd real trucks have has spoiled you, because they canb do more w/o decent traction. Id rather actually have traction because 4wd wont help you stop dude. its certainly better than getting stuck though




but really, let me appoligize, Ive gone waaaaaaaaaaaaay off topic

 

[mvbighead]

I'm not an AWD naysayer, I drive a 4x4. does your silverado have a locker in the rear?

it could also be the ABS controlled traction control causing issues, going OMG tires are moving at differnet speeds so we should slow them all down!!!

i hate that.

tires fix alot of these issues

are you saying you cant get started but you can apply moderate braking and stop fine w/o traction issues?


it sounds like the nice 4wd real trucks have has spoiled you, because they canb do more w/o decent traction. Id rather actually have traction because 4wd wont help you stop dude. its certainly better than getting stuck though




but really, let me appoligize, Ive gone waaaaaaaaaaaaay off topic

No, I guess my issue is with severe traction inability, IE - 6 to 8 inches of snow. My truck climbs over and through with no problems. The Equinox gets stuck because the AWD system is really just pathetic. If all wheels put forth an effort and I was still getting nowhere, I could see it, but that's not the case. The Jeep I had for one winter at this new home, and with cheap Lemans tires on it, I never once had an issue.

All these factors have lead me to the idea that if I had a true AWD family vehicle, I would never have to worry about my wife and son being stuck at the bottom the road that leads to our house because they lost traction halfway up the hill. I nearly got stuck with Bridgestone whatevers on the Impala one time, and I'd really not like to have that happen with my wife while trying to get our son home in freezing temperatures.

Long story short, we live in the country with a steep grade hill. The equinox manages that hill fine, but you can hear/feel the AWD kick in when it does, which isn't often. It more or less gives you a boost through slick spots. I am thinking, based on what I am seeing in those videos, that the Subaru is a much more useful AWD system.

To top it off, going from 175hp to 250hp would make the car a bit more enjoyable. And the interior of the Tribeca appears to be worlds different from the cheap feeling Equinox. Still need to go drive it, but from all I've read, some items make it "rival" the interior of a Lexus RX, and coming from an econobox Equinox, if it is even remotely in that ballpark, it'll be a major upgrade.

I know I'll stand to lose some MPG, but by and large, the Tribeca should be a much improved vehicle over the Equinox, which is what I am looking for.

 

[mvbighead]

Well, got the chance to drive 2 of our options, and the first was darn near perfect. It did have a loose or bad strut, and one of the vents in the dash were broken. After checking the second option, we quickly called back the first place and arranged pick up for Tuesday. Wife loves it, and the interior is very nice.

Price wise we tried to haggle, but as the dealer is fixing the two issues and the maintenance records were impeccable, I just couldn't find a justification for getting the price down. The other option was cheaper, but didn't have a reverse camera, nor navigation, and it had been keyed all the way down the passenger side.

Wish we could have drove it home, but we'll have to wait for the maintenance issues to be resolved.

All in, a fully loaded 2008 Tribeca with 66k miles for 17k isn't too bad.

 

[mvbighead]

Well, got the chance to drive 2 of our options, and the first was darn near perfect. It did have a loose or bad strut, and one of the vents in the dash were broken. After checking the second option, we quickly called back the first place and arranged pick up for Tuesday. Wife loves it, and the interior is very nice.

Price wise we tried to haggle, but as the dealer is fixing the two issues and the maintenance records were impeccable, I just couldn't find a justification for getting the price down. The other option was cheaper, but didn't have a reverse camera, nor navigation, and it had been keyed all the way down the passenger side.

Wish we could have drove it home, but we'll have to wait for the maintenance issues to be resolved.

All in, a fully loaded 2008 Tribeca with 66k miles for 17k isn't too bad.

 

[Blieb]

They discontinued the Tribeca for 2014, right?

 

[NutBucket]

Yep.