Is Subaru taking over?

[FearoftheNight]

I noticed lately that everywhere I go I see a subaru. ALot of impreza and those hatchbacks of theirs (outback?). Anyone else notice? How are their sales in the US?

 

[RagingBITCH]

Taking over? Taking over what? The only Subaru's I see on the road are WRx's, the only Subaru that's worth the money. (Until the Legacy arrives)

 

[FearoftheNight]

All I know is that I see that starry subaru logo everywhere I go.

 

[BigSmooth]

No, they're not taking over. The total number of Subarus sold each month is less than half the number of Toyota Camrys sold. They're stronger in some markets so they might be more common in your area, but their sales volume is not up there with the big guns.

 

[FearoftheNight]

hmm maybe they just stand out more...and the wrx sti is pretty....

doesnt' look practical for commuting tho...

 

[DaWhim]

I think Ford is taking over....back in 1920's

 

[StageLeft]

I think that until they offer subarus without AWD they will always have a tough time really gaining as much market share as they otherwise could in places like the south. Why the hell do I need AWD? I don't, but I have to pay for it if I buy a subaru, and that costs them manufacturing costs. Our friends who recently bought a forester wanted AWD "for safety". Well by God I don't know what safety they're talking about. It's not like they are going to race their new car, and it never snows here, so other than a marginal increase in stability while handling in the rain, what the heck is the point? It's really a waste of money, and it raises the cost of a subaru higher than it should be.

Of course in the forester XT it's another matter when you dump the clutch at 5k

 

[ElFenix]

AWD isn't all its cracked up to be. certainly not the guardian angels flying next to your bmw sport-wagon

 

[Aharami]

Originally posted by: ElFenix
AWD isn't all its cracked up to be. certainly not the guardian angels flying next to your bmw sport-wagon

bimmers come with guardian angels?! :Q

no wonder they cost so much

 

[FearoftheNight]

i give awd too much credit...

but thats prob cuz we get ~140 in of snow a winter

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: FearoftheNight
i give awd too much credit...

but thats prob cuz we get ~140 in of snow a winter

It's nice in the snow. Definitely not a requirement and FWD cuts it in most cases for urban dwellers, but AWD would be a much bigger benefit if I lived up north. Down in the south I basically see it as extra weight and cost and drivetrain loss.

 

[WinkOsmosis]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: FearoftheNight
i give awd too much credit...

but thats prob cuz we get ~140 in of snow a winter

It's nice in the snow. Definitely not a requirement and FWD cuts it in most cases for urban dwellers, but AWD would be a much bigger benefit if I lived up north. Down in the south I basically see it as extra weight and cost and drivetrain loss.

You're just mad because the wife makes you drive the Sentra.

 

[Entity]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
I think that until they offer subarus without AWD they will always have a tough time really gaining as much market share as they otherwise could in places like the south. Why the hell do I need AWD? I don't, but I have to pay for it if I buy a subaru, and that costs them manufacturing costs. Our friends who recently bought a forester wanted AWD "for safety". Well by God I don't know what safety they're talking about. It's not like they are going to race their new car, and it never snows here, so other than a marginal increase in stability while handling in the rain, what the heck is the point? It's really a waste of money, and it raises the cost of a subaru higher than it should be.

Of course in the forester XT it's another matter when you dump the clutch at 5k

IIRC, they offered cars without AWD in the late 80's/early 90's and it was a failed experiment. They mah have realized that market dominance wasn't working as well for them as niche dominance, where they seem to be doing quite well.

Rob

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: WinkOsmosis

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: FearoftheNight
i give awd too much credit...

but thats prob cuz we get ~140 in of snow a winter

It's nice in the snow. Definitely not a requirement and FWD cuts it in most cases for urban dwellers, but AWD would be a much bigger benefit if I lived up north. Down in the south I basically see it as extra weight and cost and drivetrain loss.

You're just mad because the wife makes you drive the Sentra.

You're mad that you never drive a maxima!

 

[Entity]

You see a ton of Subaru's here in Seattle, but a lot of that has to do with the fact that they're great cars for the 45minute trip up into the passes to go snowboarding/skiing.

Rob

 

[CChaos]

Originally posted by: ElFenix
AWD isn't all its cracked up to be. certainly not the guardian angels flying next to your bmw sport-wagon

Interesting. You're bashing Subaru for offering AWD standard on all thier cars in a world where FWD is considered "economical" and the various inferior AWD systems other manufacturers offer is always an expensive option. You do realize that all AWD systems are not created equal right?

To the OP, no Subaru isn't taking over, but the WRX is a damn sweet ride and in the northeast Subaru has a nice piece of the market because of standard AWD.

 

[StageLeft]

To the OP, no Subaru isn't taking over, but the WRX is a damn sweet ride and in the northeast Subaru has a nice piece of the market because of standard AWD.

I think the standard AWD is just the reason you see so few of them in the south. Most of the ones I see are owned by boy racers and they're wrxs. I've seen a couple of STIs only. Essentially no imprezas or outbacks or legacies, and the ocassional forester now.

 

[Thegonagle]

Up north, they're very popular. The standard AWD is great whenever the snow flies. Because they're little cars instead of heavy trucks, they handle much better in the white stuff. (I'm speaking from personal experience, folks--it's true!)

Down south, where 2 wheels driving is almost always fine, the standard AWD is more of a liability than an asset. (Bigger price tag, heavier, slower, poorer mileage, more complex/expensive maintenance and repairs, etc.)

 

[Thegonagle]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
I think that until they offer subarus without AWD they will always have a tough time really gaining as much market share as they otherwise could in places like the south.

They used to offer 2WD Subarus here, but the marketing geniuses decided to make standard AWD into Subaru's new "identity" in late 90s. I don't think it was a bad plan when they did it, and now that Subaru sales have rebounded significantly, they could probably stand to make it optional again in a few more years.

 

[CChaos]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

To the OP, no Subaru isn't taking over, but the WRX is a damn sweet ride and in the northeast Subaru has a nice piece of the market because of standard AWD.

I think the standard AWD is just the reason you see so few of them in the south. Most of the ones I see are owned by boy racers and they're wrxs. I've seen a couple of STIs only. Essentially no imprezas or outbacks or legacies, and the ocassional forester now.

I'm not suprised, nor do I think this is really a bad thing. Personally, I'd rather see a manufacturer focus on doing what it does well, rather than scrambling to develop products or watering down current content to fill every niche in the automotive market.