Test drove both. Not enough of a noticeable difference to justify the price, IMHO. Would really only matter if you were regularly towing or climbing mountains.

The real difference - and which I test drove - was the last year of the R6 (six cylinder engine) on the 2019 model and the new XT (4 cylinder with a turbo charger) on the 2020 model. The R6 made a big difference. However, I didn't like that it was a gas guzzler.

Ended up buying a 2019 model with four cylinders. 90% of our miles are in NW DC or MoCo. I've taken our Outback to Snowshoe and other ski areas in West Virginia with no problems. I've driven our 4 cylinder on the deep sand beaches in OBX and it did great.

It's just an awesome car and I think there is very little justification for upgrading to the XT.

“I wish I had less power available to me when driving”

-no one, ever

We used to have an XT. The extra hp was nice for highway driving and steep hills, especially with lots of cargo. Unloaded, it was a really fun car to play with. (But you did have to account for the turbo lag.)

I say “used to have” because the engine was a lemon. At under 100k miles, we started having severe issues with the engine — pistons misfiring, valves sticking, money hemorrhaging. Did some seriously expensive replacement work, only to have the problem reoccur. We reached a point where it just wasn’t worth it.

Anonymous wrote:The 4 cylinder normally aspirated OBs are generally underpowered. Whether and how much this matters to you will be illuminated by a test drive.

I had a 4 cylinder IB for 9 years, very trashy on the highway and lots of downshifting with kayaks on roof. The 6 cylinder is smooth and quiet and comfortable and gets the same fuel economy as my ‘09 4 cylinder. No more 6-cylinder engines for Subaru, so my current H6 may well be my last one.

“...4 cylinder OB ... [not IB]………”

The 4 cylinder normally aspirated OBs are generally underpowered. Whether and how much this matters to you will be illuminated by a test drive.

I had a 4 cylinder IB for 9 years, very trashy on the highway and lots of downshifting with kayaks on roof. The 6 cylinder is smooth and quiet and comfortable and gets the same fuel economy as my ‘09 4 cylinder. No more 6-cylinder engines for Subaru, so my current H6 may well be my last one.

The Outback is built on the same frame as the Legacy, so if you don't like how your Legacy drives, you will not like how the Outback drives.

I, personally, haven't had a problem with the smaller engine and we drive through the mountains pretty regularly. It's really personal preference.

Anonymous wrote:I am purchasing a new outback soon, but am wondering if it is worth the extra 2500 for 80 HO.
I currently drive a legacy (171 HP vs current 182) and can say it could use a little zip at times. But the key thing is at times.

I am going to buy the high end -- touring.

Upside of the XT: is 80 HP and 100 ft-lbs of torque (regular, I think)
That translated to about 2 seconds 0-60.

Downside: 2500 upfront
more complex system
question reviews regarding the CVT/Engine link
more likely to get a ticket/I have a lead foot
Would be tempting to spend more on gas for better performance

Why not just leave 2sec earlier?

Well depends on how you drive and your preferences.

However, for myself, i believe if you buy the car you want (that you can afford and meets the needs), you are going to save in the long run by keeping it longer.

That being said, I don’t lease.

Anonymous wrote:If there is no other reason than too feel good, don't bother.

What a view on life. I guess you don't pay for cheese on your whopper.

If there is no other reason than too feel good, don't bother.

Not op, but op probably meant +80hp over the alternative.

Buy the hp if you want it. I would.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am purchasing a new outback soon, but am wondering if it is worth the extra 2500 for 80 HO.
I currently drive a legacy (171 HP vs current 182) and can say it could use a little zip at times. But the key thing is at times.

I am going to buy the high end -- touring.

Upside of the XT: is 80 HP and 100 ft-lbs of torque (regular, I think)
That translated to about 2 seconds 0-60.

Downside: 2500 upfront
more complex system
question reviews regarding the CVT/Engine link
more likely to get a ticket/I have a lead foot
Would be tempting to spend more on gas for better performance

Are you sure it’s only 80hp? Probably more over 200hp.

182 vs 260. they would have to rework the tranny to support 380 HP

Anonymous wrote:I am purchasing a new outback soon, but am wondering if it is worth the extra 2500 for 80 HO.
I currently drive a legacy (171 HP vs current 182) and can say it could use a little zip at times. But the key thing is at times.

I am going to buy the high end -- touring.

Upside of the XT: is 80 HP and 100 ft-lbs of torque (regular, I think)
That translated to about 2 seconds 0-60.

Downside: 2500 upfront
more complex system
question reviews regarding the CVT/Engine link
more likely to get a ticket/I have a lead foot
Would be tempting to spend more on gas for better performance

Are you sure it’s only 80hp? Probably more over 200hp.

I am purchasing a new outback soon, but am wondering if it is worth the extra 2500 for 80 HO.
I currently drive a legacy (171 HP vs current 182) and can say it could use a little zip at times. But the key thing is at times.

I am going to buy the high end -- touring.

Upside of the XT: is 80 HP and 100 ft-lbs of torque (regular, I think)
That translated to about 2 seconds 0-60.

Downside: 2500 upfront
more complex system
question reviews regarding the CVT/Engine link
more likely to get a ticket/I have a lead foot
Would be tempting to spend more on gas for better performance