Anonymous
02/04/2020 18:08
Subject: Which of these would you buy?
Neither, that is too high miles.
Anonymous
02/04/2020 18:04
Subject: Which of these would you buy?
Anonymous wrote:Don't buy a Subaru without a manual transmission. The automatic is a CVT, and they are total garbage. You'll be lucky if you get 100k miles before it grenades itself.
And, if you get a manual (only available in the Forester to 2018, the Outback to 2010-12(?), and now only in the Crosstrek base or premium), you will not get the EyeSight driver assist features. I was all set to get a Crosstrek to get a manual and ended up going a different direction for better engine and driver assist with a manual.
Anonymous
02/02/2020 20:57
Subject: Which of these would you buy?
Don't buy a Subaru without a manual transmission. The automatic is a CVT, and they are total garbage. You'll be lucky if you get 100k miles before it grenades itself.
Anonymous
02/02/2020 15:36
Subject: Which of these would you buy?
My 2010 forester is going strong with 73k miles. My 2019 forester has also been great. The 2019 has way more power And gas mileage even though it has a CVT. Eyesight is great. It’s handy in traffic where people suddenly slam on the breaks like in the dc metro area.
Anonymous
01/30/2020 14:12
Subject: Which of these would you buy?
2017, but IME, Subarus need a lot of work. Every single one has a rattling engine, and they have CVT transmissions which are complete junk.
Anonymous
01/30/2020 09:35
Subject: Which of these would you buy?
Not knowing the trim, the 2017 is better rated and may include the driver assist package (EyeSight) that was optional on the 2015, if that is important to you. If you're fine with an older car, I'm never a fan of blowing your whole budget when you don't have to.
Having recently driven a few Subarus (was looking at Forester and Crosstrek to replace an early 2000s vehicle), the acceleration on them is really, really sluggish. That was a dealbreaker for me in DC traffic. Nice vehicles, people I know that have them love them (except one, who's Outback has spent more time with the dealership service department than her), but when my early 2000s mid-sized, mid-trim sedan has more torque and HP for a smaller vehicle, that's a hard no.
Having recently driven a few Subarus (was looking at Forester and Crosstrek to replace an early 2000s vehicle), the acceleration on them is really, really sluggish. That was a dealbreaker for me in DC traffic. Nice vehicles, people I know that have them love them (except one, who's Outback has spent more time with the dealership service department than her), but when my early 2000s mid-sized, mid-trim sedan has more torque and HP for a smaller vehicle, that's a hard no.
Anonymous
01/23/2020 13:15
Subject: Which of these would you buy?
I am in the market for a used Subaru Outback.
Which of these two cars would you suggest that I buy? I can buy a 2017 with 47,000 miles for $21k or I can buy a 2015 with 41,000 miles for $18,500.
Both of these are within my budget but the 2017 would use my entire sinking fund for a new car. My other car has a few years left in it so I would have time to rebuild.
Which of these two cars would you suggest that I buy? I can buy a 2017 with 47,000 miles for $21k or I can buy a 2015 with 41,000 miles for $18,500.
Both of these are within my budget but the 2017 would use my entire sinking fund for a new car. My other car has a few years left in it so I would have time to rebuild.