Would you trade?

I'm reasonably happy with my 1996 Lagacy Outback 5-speed. But I have a chance to pick up a 1998 Legacy Outback Limited edition. They look almost exactly the same, but for the little hoodscoop looking thing on the hood of the Limited. It's an automatic.

I can probably sell mine for around $4,000 and buy the newer one for around $4700. I'm told the engine is a four cyl, like mine.

If I've left anything out, just post and I'll follow the thread. Oh yeah, both cars have 147K miles.

tia

jim

Reply to
celdt celdt
Loading thread data ...

It's a gamble. You're picking up 2 years of styling and a lot of options (options that can break perhaps?), but you're giving up the value of a known maintenance history and knowing how the car's been cared for, which for a car that age is pretty significant.

I'm not sure the benefit would outweigh the risk for me, but if you like the newer Limited that much better, heck, spin the wheel.

-- Todd H.

2001 Legacy Outback Wagon, 2.5L H-4 Chicago, Illinois USA
Reply to
Todd H.

If you have the 2.2L engine in your 96, stick with that. The 98 has the garbage 4 cam engine with a variety of problems......the 2.2 is one of the best engines Subaru has made, and should go a long time. Opinion based on personal experience and 25 years as a Subaru tech....just my 2 cents

Reply to
Tlather

My friend and I have had seven Subarus, with the 2.2 (one Impreza Outback Sport 5 sp, and an original Outback auto) RS 2.5 Impreza stick, 2.5 Legacy auto, 2.0 WRX turbo stick and 3.0, 5 speed automatics in both a new Outback and Tribeca. Found the 2.2 to be underpowered, even in the Outback Sport. Unless you drive on flat terrain, don't carry any kind of a load, and don't care much about performance, even accelerating into highway traffic moving at the speed limit, I can't see much reason to choose the 2.2. If your tech experience indicates an overwhelming advantage in durability and serviceability, that counts for something, but we've had no reliability issues with any of the seven cars (or trucks, as the Tribeca and Outback 3.0 (!) are now classified) over the

500,000-600,000 miles we've driven them. Given the weight of the Outback, especially a Limited with its extra equipment, I'd have some misgivings about the 2.2 motivating a 3500 lb vehicle. Sure, a 2.2 stick will provide better acceleration and more control than a 2.5 auto, but wouldn't be my choice, especially in the hilly area we live in, usually loaded with kids and dogs and cargo. That said, to each his/her own.
Reply to
suburboturbo

celdtceldt seems to be weighing the advantages of buying a slightly newer car versus keeping the old one, which he says he is reasonably happy with.....I drive a 96 Outback which I've had since new, and I have not experienced power problems with it. I've hauled hundreds of pounds of sound equipment, camping gear, building materials, 4 passengers, and yes, while my perception of underpowered may be different than yours, Suburboturbo, I don't have any problem with traffic in the Balto/DC area in this car. I have seen far fewer problems with this engine/trans combo than with the later versions, and to me, reliability is the main thing. Every 4 cam engine'd car that comes in the shop is noisey, leaks oil(unless that's been fixed) and/or needs head gaskets, and that is a given(unless that too has been fixed). I've got about 187K on my car, all I've done is oil changes, the occasional tune up, brakes, and tires(and valve cover gaskets), which is not bad; if I had to drive to California tomorrow in that car, no problem....all I am advocating is to stick with the known quantity; bells and whistles don't get you where you want to go, I think Todd H. and I are in agreement on this....good luck celdtceldt and may the best car win......

Reply to
Tlather

Thank you all for your well-considered responses. I think I'm voting for keeping the '96, warts and all. In fact, just yesterday I noticed my parking lights won't go off, so I'm disconnecting the battery each time I leave it for any length of time. I have an appointment with the shop for next week. Someday I'll get a Subaru from the present millenium. Thanks again all!

Reply to
celdt celdt

Check the switch on the top of the steering column.

Reply to
Bugalugs

Who wants to be the one to tell him/her about the Subaru Virginity Switch?

Reply to
nobody >

Hi,

Add my vote to Todd's and Tlather's: you KNOW what your car's all about. "Warts and all," as you said, you're probably not likely to be faced w/ surprising repair needs/bills that you had no idea were coming.

OTOH, the "newer" car may be faultless, or it may have all kinds of "little" things wrong or "getting ready" to go wrong. So you need to set aside a "slush fund" to cover contingencies that are less likely w/ a "known" car.

All else being equal, the dealbreaker for me would be the automatic trans. Overlooking the fact I'm "old school" enough to believe it should be illegal to burden a four cyl w/ an auto, let's just look at cost: clutch jobs are nothing compared to auto rebuilds costwise, and a 10 yr old auto has probably not gotten better w/ age. Add another exspensive bill to your "probable" list...

Rick

Reply to
Rick Courtright

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.