I have a 98 Legacy that I bought in February, Just wondering why it
eats so much gas ...I barely get 450 kilometers per tank on the
highway .. not exactly 600 that I was geting in my Suzuki sidekick
.. even though it was a 1600 cc engine .... why is Subaru such a gas
pig ?


--
--------------------------------- --- -- -
Posted with NewsLeecher v3.8 Final
Web @ http://www.newsleecher.com/?usenet
------------------- ----- ---- -- -

On Jun 3, 6:09 pm, "S.Lewis" <stew1...@mail.com> wrote:
> "stanny" <stan...@rogers.com> wrote in message
>
> news:CmI8i.19808$Cl.23@fe76.usenetserver.com...
>
> > I have a 98 Legacy that I bought in February, Just wondering why it
> > eats so much gas ...I barely get 450 kilometers per tank on the
> > highway .. not exactly 600 that I was geting in my Suzuki sidekick
> > . even though it was a 1600 cc engine .... why is Subaru such a gas
> > pig ?

because 1.8liter engines are long, long, long gone
along with the lighter imprezas and legacies of the yore.

> All wheel drive, my friend.....and if you have an H6 versus the 4 I suspect
> that wouldn't help.
>
> The early 90's Legacy models that had front-wheel drive (and a 4-banger)
> easily got over 20 in the city and near 30mpg hwy, or at least mine did.
>
As does my 05 OBS: i'll resist the temptation to rant (again) on
the 5th gear ratio that enables that breathtaking highway
mileage.

> I'll resist the temptation to rant about Subaru choosing to go exclusively
> to AWD, because it doesn't matter and no one wants to hear it anyway.
>
As if it would be competitive in case awd is stripped.
there is no way i would've looked at (let alone contemplated
buying) a subaru if it did not have a symmetric awd.
strip an awd from subayota and you'd be left with a toyolet.
who wants a toyolet camry when you can have subayota
legacy for the same money with a working awd and the exact same
amenities?

On Jun 3, 7:43 pm, stanny (stan...@rogers.com) wrote:
> I have a 98 Legacy that I bought in February, Just wondering why it
> eats so much gas ...I barely get 450 kilometers per tank on the
> highway .. not exactly 600 that I was geting in my Suzuki sidekick
> . even though it was a 1600 cc engine .... why is Subaru such a gas
> pig ?

And don't forget weight..... Did your Sidekick have airbags? ABS?
These and various other safety items all add weight.

Dan D
(formerly) '99 Legacy L 30th (son's)
Central NJ USA

On Jun 5, 9:24 am, "S.Lewis" <stew1...@mail.com> wrote:
> <isq...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1180941196.677031.213140@d30g2000prg.googlegr oups.com...
>
>
>
> > On Jun 3, 6:09 pm, "S.Lewis" <stew1...@mail.com> wrote:
> >> "stanny" <stan...@rogers.com> wrote in message
>
> >>news:CmI8i.19808$Cl.23@fe76.usenetserver.com.. .
>
> >> > I have a 98 Legacy that I bought in February, Just wondering why it
> >> > eats so much gas ...I barely get 450 kilometers per tank on the
> >> > highway .. not exactly 600 that I was geting in my Suzuki sidekick
> >> > . even though it was a 1600 cc engine .... why is Subaru such a gas
> >> > pig ?
>
> > because 1.8liter engines are long, long, long gone
> > along with the lighter imprezas and legacies of the yore.
>
> >> All wheel drive, my friend.....and if you have an H6 versus the 4 I
> >> suspect
> >> that wouldn't help.
>
> >> The early 90's Legacy models that had front-wheel drive (and a 4-banger)
> >> easily got over 20 in the city and near 30mpg hwy, or at least mine did.
>
> > As does my 05 OBS: i'll resist the temptation to rant (again) on
> > the 5th gear ratio that enables that breathtaking highway
> > mileage.
>
> >> I'll resist the temptation to rant about Subaru choosing to go
> >> exclusively
> >> to AWD, because it doesn't matter and no one wants to hear it anyway.
>
> > As if it would be competitive in case awd is stripped.
> > there is no way i would've looked at (let alone contemplated
> > buying) a subaru if it did not have a symmetric awd.
> > strip an awd from subayota and you'd be left with a toyolet.
> > who wants a toyolet camry when you can have subayota
> > legacy for the same money with a working awd and the exact same
> > amenities?
>
> I wasn't suggesting that AWD be abandoned altogether as I think you know.
> However, it would be nice for those of us in non-winter or non-mountainous
> areas to have that option (once again).
>
> As to whether such vehicles could be or were competitive in the market, I
> suppose that depends on what criteria would be used. Perhaps there's not
> enough profit in producing them or Soob feels the market is too crowded.

I think Subaru read the writing on the wall and felt like they would
be squeezed between Honda/Toyota and the rapidly-improving Korean cars
(Kia, Hyundai). They may have felt like their AWD technology could be
the differentiating factor for them. I'm not sure they have the money
or reputation to keep pace with H/T, and the cost advantages that the
Koreans have right now mean that they could build comparable-quality
cars for a couple thousand less. Hence, the all-AWD, all the time
approach. I think it's been pretty effective for them.

Mazda has done something similar with their 'sporty' approach and
emphasis on the performance of their vehicles across the line.

Dan D
(formerly) '99 Legacy L 30th (son's)
Central NJ USA

Sidekick was very heavy 3600 pounds to be exact


--
--------------------------------- --- -- -
Posted with NewsLeecher v3.8 Final
Web @ http://www.newsleecher.com/?usenet
------------------- ----- ---- -- -