Except that Subaru hasn’t
Except that Subaru hasn’t done the right thing.
My whole family has owned Subaru vehicles since the 90s. We had 5 legacy/outback/forester 2.5 engines built 2000-2006 with head gasket failures before 80k and there was literally zero response from Subaru. After the second, we stopped using their service departments because we felt like they were profiting from their own defects. 5 failures isn’t a driver issue.
I love the platform. Nothing drives like the manual 50/50 split AWD of my 1997 Legacy and nothing could stop my 1991 Loyale with hill holder clutch and locking center differential.
I have shopped newer models but never decided to buy for all of the reasons I see on these comments: CVT, previous company response to very widely known defects, move away from simplicity and platform strengths to “me to” big SUV size and features. Clearly these things haven’t prevented Subaru’s market success, but it makes me think of how Patagonia pursued the demands of growing to mass market potential only to outgrow its strengths and soul before being taken back to its roots.
Subaru used to be about simplicity, utility, goats, sheep, dogs, postal drivers, college students, camping, climbing, twisty roads, moving across the country. When they are about that again, I’ll be the market. If not, maybe I’ll just buy an old one for the nostalgia of a bygone era.