Subaru shows the new Legacy Concept

smh0101 · Post by **smh0101** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 12:34 am

http://www.motorauthority.com/subaru-pr ... debut.html

Nice 2010 Toyota Camry... now wheres the Legacy??

SiCkSTi04 · Post by **SiCkSTi04** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 12:52 am

to me it looks like a big fat nissan maxima/altima

im sure the final product will look nothing like that haha

555BCTurbo · Post by **555BCTurbo** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 1:12 am

Super fail

evolutionmovement · Post by **evolutionmovement** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 1:13 am

It's friggin' horrible. I'm going to have to trade in for another damn Mazda because nobody else can make a remotely desirable cheap vehicle. Civic Si doesn't come in a hatch and doesn't handle as well. Subarus are ugly beyond words, the interiors look terrible, the gas mileage sucks, and I still have no confidence in the 2.5.

Why the hell can't they make it look like a damn Alfa 159? They couldn't build them fast enough.

Aerotech · Post by **Aerotech** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 1:36 am

smh0101 wrote: Nice 2010 Toyota Camry... now wheres the Legacy??

Boy, you said it...

They are built side-by-side in Indiana, I guess they decided to share body panels.

What's with the Thalidomide-kid stub mirrors??

entirelyturbo · Post by **entirelyturbo** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 1:51 am

I don't see any Camry in it and very little Maxima.

I see a cheap rip-off of an Audi grill and the rear quarter view from the side profile looks nearly identical to a BMW 5-series. The panel between the rear seats with the Subaru symbol is a rip-off of the waterfall between the seats of a C5 Vette convertible. And the TVs in the headrests? Pimp My Ride, but somehow even more pretentious.

No other automaker has this bad of an identity crisis.

I don't care anymore. I picked my Honda over a Subaru for a reason, and I'm not looking back.

555BCTurbo · Post by **555BCTurbo** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 2:12 am

Yeah...why can't automakers go back to the way things were in the 90s...

I mean seriously...90s cars are simple, cleanly designed, functional, don't weigh a ton, and didn't cost an arm and a leg

evolutionmovement · Post by **evolutionmovement** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 3:00 am

I agree. The early 90's were the peak of automobiles—rust issues were controlled nearly to their peak, electronics were simple, yet reliable and controlled the engines very well and efficiently, easy to work on, chassis weighed a reasonable amount, were pretty safe, handled decently, etc. Since then, they've gotten bloated, uglier, and took a dive in terms of reliability and mileage. Today it takes stupid technology to get an ugly car to approach the mileage of a CRX HE that, while not as safe, was fun to drive, dead reliable, and easy to work on (Honda was still a little behind with the rust thing, though). These old Legacys were really some of the best cars ever made. I'd buy a brand new one today if they remade them and would sign any disclaimer and waive any liability necessary to get it. Would be nice if they improved the headlights and added direct injection to it, though.

skid542 · Post by **skid542** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 3:26 am

*sigh, hangs head*

ericem · Post by **ericem** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 4:10 am

evolutionmovement wrote:I agree. The early 90's were the peak of automobiles—rust issues were controlled nearly to their peak, electronics were simple, yet reliable and controlled the engines very well and efficiently, easy to work on, chassis weighed a reasonable amount, were pretty safe, handled decently, etc. Since then, they've gotten bloated, uglier, and took a dive in terms of reliability and mileage. Today it takes stupid technology to get an ugly car to approach the mileage of a CRX HE that, while not as safe, was fun to drive, dead reliable, and easy to work on (Honda was still a little behind with the rust thing, though). These old Legacys were really some of the best cars ever made. I'd buy a brand new one today if they remade them and would sign any disclaimer and waive any liability necessary to get it. Would be nice if they improved the headlights and added direct injection to it, though.

agreed. Tried newer Subaru's, actually many cars in general. This 94 Legacy Turbo tops them all. It is insane how it held up, very quick, quiet, pretty modern features, simple and clean. Most importantly I know it will be reliable.

Only car I MIGHT consider today would be newer Subaru Legacy's 2009+ that now have a H6 with many standard features including VDC and 5EAT.

beatersubi · Post by **beatersubi** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 7:17 pm

I also see a touch of Infinity in the side profile. It looks like they're trying to incorporate an i-Drive like central feature control device.

I think that Subaru is simply trying to pander to the largest market share possible rather than continue to make the unique and purposeful cars that made the company's success. Probably just (mandatorily) following Toyota's recipie for success.

evolutionmovement · Post by **evolutionmovement** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 7:47 pm

Except Toyota sells cars to fearful, boring people in spite of their looks by milking their reputation for reliability. Subaru isn't a first-call name brand (like Toyota or Honda) that people think of when they go shopping. They need something else to draw people and ugly and derivative doesn't do it. That's why they haven't been able to move upscale like they wanted to. As I said, make it look like an Alfa and they'd sell as many as they could build. If and when Alfa comes back to the States (FIAT just bought a 35% stake in Chrysler for distribution), I'll be looking at one in spite of their poor reputation and my general mistrust of European cars because they look so damn good (they'll have to match their reputation for driving enjoyment as well). They'll have a market to themselves—a practical car that looks good and is fun to drive. Hell, just being the latter would put them in a very small group.

John Drivesabox · Post by **John Drivesabox** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 7:55 pm

I thought everyone was just being harsh until I looked at the pictures. One of the worst looking cars I've seen in a while. Reminded me of the way I felt when I saw the Pontiac Aztec for the first time, or when I was a kid and I saw the AMC Eagle.

It does look like it has some nice features on the inside. And since I'm too lazy to read the whole article, can anyone tell what sort of brake setup that is?

PhyrraM · Post by **PhyrraM** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 11:35 pm

My gosh, all I see is a bunch of whiners.

I wonder, if you were your current age in 1990, how well the 'new Legacy' would be recieved.

"I mean, geez, it looks just like a '90 Accord or Camry, or Stanza. Hell even that new Hyundia...what's it called...Oh yeah..the Sonata. Them Japanese sedans all look the same. Nothing like the classic and timeless Subarus [renamed Loyale] we have now. Subaru will be gone in 5 years at this rate. The'll be just like the rest."

Talk about a bland year for cars? All these are '90s and randomly found just now.

skid542 · Post by **skid542** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 11:45 pm

^^^ Haha, I was waiting for someone to raise this valid point.

I won't argue the point, though I will still maintain that the new Legacy just doesn't look right to me.

evolutionmovement · Post by **evolutionmovement** » Sun Jan 25, 2009 12:41 am

Any era of cars can be compared the same way, even many (rightfully) vaunted 50's and 60's sports cars could be accused of looking the same. Design follows trends, but used to strive towards an ideal: form follows function. Those early 90's cars met those goals. Were they adventurously styled? No, but that's the market, as it is today. They were, however, besides form following function, anonymous perhaps, but not ugly for the sake of being different (though really not different at all. Conformist in their non-conformity). I wouldn't even doubt it if the 1990's Legacy were more aerodynamically efficient than these new monstrosities (perhaps a hundredth or two higher cd, but with a smaller frontal area).

With this ugly new garbage, self-aggrandizing, overrated stylists, like high school freshman doodling in notebook margins, over-style the hell out of cars they've, in turn, cribbed from other mediocre stylists, resulting in this non-cohesive, incongruent trash. Unlike the cars you pictures, this is dubious form over function, the mark of a stylist, and poor ones at that. And I thought Bangle was horrible, but what's worse is these hacks copying him and the legacy he wrought. This is the result of parents who raise their children to think they're god's gift even when they come in second to last place and then pay ass loads of money to put them through design school.

There's no reason for this at all. People buy this trash because there are no beautiful alternatives. Once again, where's the guy hacking Alfa Romeo? If you're going to copy a painting, how about a Rembrandt instead of a kindergarten project?

Aptera has shown there's no need to be a slave to classical form or resort to aimless ugly for the future of design. Form follows function. That's basic design principle #1.

Here's a brilliant guy, without the typical douche designer ego, and with a great sense of humor that we're bound to hear more from:

http://i.gizmodo.com/5131414/the-cadill ... -year-8000

I hope he gets free reign somewhere someday.

But what really bothers us, me at least, about the Legacy is that the current one is the last attractive Subaru. I would love to be able to buy a Subaru next, but these embarrassing designs are like nails on a chalk board. And it's not just Subaru, either, as nobody else really offers anything great. Just that Subaru's the most ugly and I used to like them. Never cared about the rest. Looks like I'll be pushed into another Mazda as at least it handles well, has the second best steering feel in its class (which is just OK and close second to the Euro-trash Mini), and gets decent mileage. Hasn't exactly been a paragon of reliability (like the old Subarus), though. I can't blame it all on Ford—had weird electrical shit going on last week or so that I thought was an alternator. Turned out to be a mis-installed fuse from the factory. Strange it took so long to surface, but that's how these things go. It was built in Japan, so this one's on Mazda. I NEVER would have had that kind of a stupid issue with an old Subaru (not to mention any of the other problems I've had).

skid542 · Post by **skid542** » Sun Jan 25, 2009 1:32 am

evolutionmovement wrote:With this ugly new garbage, self-aggrandizing, overrated stylists, like high school freshman doodling in notebook margins, over-style the hell out of cars they've, in turn, cribbed from other mediocre stylists, resulting in this non-cohesive, incongruent trash.

Haha, some things are just worth quoting. You're the man Steve.

entirelyturbo · Post by **entirelyturbo** » Sun Jan 25, 2009 1:44 am

I'd say that during virtually any era of automotive design since the popularization of the automobile, about 80% of cars intended for the general public have all looked mostly the same.

Most 50s cars looked the same (what car didn't have fins in the 50s?), through the 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s, and all the way up through today, when every single f'ing car on the road has the same stupid triangular-headlight-and-trapezoidal-grill design, and IMO are just as bland as the 90s were.

As Steve said, form follows function. The 90s Japanese sedans didn't stand out from each other much, no. They were built to compete with each other, to offer reliable transportation to lower-middle-class American families. That's it.

See, what Subaru did was build their first-gen Legacy just a little bit better. The Sonatas and Stanzas were junk. That's why I hardly ever see them anymore while I still see old Accords and Camrys and Legacies. The Accords and Camrys are reliable cars... but the Legacy is tougher, more involving to drive, and has a bit more character.

Subaru focused their attention on building a (hey!) GOOD CAR!

Did they sell as well as the others? No. I think the saying goes 'what is popular is not always right; what is right is not always popular.' Substitute 'extraordinarily-well-built' or 'innovative' or whatever in place of 'right,' but Subaru was still sticking to their guns of building cars that weren't as refined as the others because they were tougher and more charismatic.

They did something they believed in. And anytime you do something you believe in while ignoring the status quo, you shun away the majority and find exceptionally strong favor with the minority.

That's why Subaru people used to always been so loyal, and have always been willing to forgive things like noisier frameless windows and the goofy parking light switch (yes, I'm still on about that). The cars were just, better somehow.

That's why I used to like them. I recognized it and appreciated it.

Now they've sold out. They no longer value those ideals or strive to achieve them. They're solely after sales figures now. Now think they're too good to compete with the Japanese midsize sedans anymore, and are aiming squarely at the pompous douche nozzles who usually buy European cars.

Sad thing is though, they have never been, and never will be, as refined as those cars. So even in their quest for more sales, they're just doing themselves in.

How do I know that Subaru is in a realm they don't belong? Their first attempt at changing markets was the Tribeca. The Tribeca hasn't sold very well since it debuted in 2006. Back then it was too ugly, and now it looks too bland. Both times it was far too expensive. We hardly ever get them in, and when we do, they just sit there.

Although I liked the 05-07 better, the Legacy is indeed the only true Subaru left as far as I'm concerned. Now Subaru wants to fuck it all up like they did the rest of their lineup.

Whatever. As I've said before, there's nothing stopping them. I don't run Subaru. If that's the direction they want to take, and they want to move on to a different market... they're more than welcome to do so.

By the exact same principle, I myself am more than welcome to move on to a different make.

So I did.

Steve, would you buy the Mazda 2 if it came here?

PhyrraM · Post by **PhyrraM** » Sun Jan 25, 2009 4:30 am

OK, I totally get form-follows-function. That was the gist of my mini photo stroll through history. I do drive one after all, and I admire it for all the same reasons you do. Tough-simple-fun to drive- etc. etc. The BC was so well engineered it survived to '07 as the GD/GG. That's was it's undoing, I guess. If it wasn't so "good enough" Subaru might have made updates faster and we could have got all this crying done with years ago.

You all seem to be saying that Subaru "sold out" or "forgot it's roots". The fact remains that Subaru designed the O.G Legacy to compete as best it could with the likes of the Camry, Accord and possibly even the Taurus and Lumina. How is the new Legacy any different? Same competion, same goals, same roots in my book.

About Subarus looks....It's a subjective thing, but other than the '05 Legacy (which is arguably the most conforming since the BC), I can't think of a single Subaru that didn't have to grow on you a little bit. The '70s and '80s were downright ugly, but eventually endearing. The '90 were plain and a bit odd. The 'bugeye' debacle was so bad Subaru rushed a nosejob, only to make it worse---twice! Why should Subaru be a 'sell-out' if this new Legacy is one that, yet again, has to grow on us?

I agree, designers are lazy, and not very creative. But, I would argue that it's not them, it's us. We won't buy anything revolutionary or expirimental. It's the consumers that dictate how the cars look.

555BCTurbo · Post by **555BCTurbo** » Sun Jan 25, 2009 4:57 am

^ Geez...what are you...some kinda Subaru Corporate sympathizer?

evolutionmovement · Post by **evolutionmovement** » Sun Jan 25, 2009 5:05 am

Subaru now thinks its competition is BMW and Infiniti. Back then they didn't really try to compete directly with the bigger volume names—they played to their strengths and grabbed a small piece of the market, but in the late 90's management decided they needed to play in the higher-margin, more secure entry-luxury market. That's all well and good, but not when you're bringing a box of ugly (plus a less well-known reputation for durable, affordable cars than their rivals who had the wisdom to give their upmarket models different names like Infiniti, Lexus, Acura who still met with mixed success), if quirky, cars to a party where everyone knows the other guests and they all have names with cache. In that party, the names mean more than the product so you'd better damn well have something to get their attention (in a good way). Hyundai has done a better job with their Genesis, just a victim of poor timing. I cannot imagine anyone buying this over a BMW, Infiniti, or even a freakin' Acura (also ugly). The still have lower end models that are more affordable (also part of the problem), but everyone offers AWD to whoever wants it and Joe Consumer doesn't know what the hell a boxer engine is or its benefits so their advantage is a wash. Their rivals tend to get better mileage, too, and none of them are as ugly.

Seeing Subaru introduce these things is like watching a drug addict go down the tubes over the course of years—just kill yourself quick and get it over with!

Mike, I'd look at the Mazda 2 if they sell it as I've read it's more fun to drive than the 3 and pretty damn light, but I hope the power/mileage compromise works for me. With these tall, short hatchbacks, the aerodynamics are so bad that the downsizing of an engine when going down from the larger model and the gearing required to move the, usually not substantially lighter, vehicle result in a large hit in performance for a not very substantial increase in mileage. But the 2 is more than a little lighter than the 3, so I'm definitely interested. If they could fit the 2.0 in it (a speed2, perhaps), it would be sold! That would be about 14 lbs/hp and probably over mid 30's for mileage depending on how they gear it (I imagine they'd put a tall top in).

PhyrraM · Post by **PhyrraM** » Sun Jan 25, 2009 5:29 am

555BCTurbo wrote:^ Geez...what are you...some kinda Subaru Corporate sympathizer?

LOL, no. I just don't see the reason for all the complaining. If we are all going to come down on something, I'd much rather it be my toaster oven or a lawnmower. Talk about heartless design!

Besides, the conversation is fun. I usually just roll on past post like these, but I guess I'm in a mood. As long as nobody takes it all personally.

555BCTurbo · Post by **555BCTurbo** » Sun Jan 25, 2009 5:59 am

PhyrraM wrote:As long as nobody takes it all personally.

Anybody would be a damn fool if they took anything from this thread personally

AWD_addict · Post by **AWD_addict** » Mon Jan 26, 2009 12:26 am

The last good-looking Subaru has now been redesigned beyond my tolerance. I hope I can find a 2005 Legacy in good condition someday.

Post by **Legacy777** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 6:18 am

That is pretty fugly....I guess we'll see if that is what actually makes it to production....

I'll take the 1st gen in the background

legacycentral bbs

A forum for 89-94 BC-BF(BJ) Legacy Owners and Fans

Subaru shows the new Legacy Concept

Subaru shows the new Legacy Concept

Re: Subaru shows the new Legacy Concept