I’m a Subaru fan… have been for years. I love their cars because they are practical and can’t be stopped in the snow. The Subaru Outback has been wildly successful in snowbelt areas and with mountain-folks alike. I’m sure most of their sales come from Utah, Colorado and Washington State, but with the release of the Impreza WRX earlier this decade, Subies are all the rage with the rice rocket crowd as well.
Because Subaru owners are loyal (I’ve owned 5 of them), Subaru introduced the B9 Tribeca for the 2006 model year with the intent of wooing Subie owners who have outgrown their Outback wagons. The result has been less-than-stellar for the bottom-line of Subaru corporate. Sales have been sluggish because of the polarizing front-end styling. Some love it… others hate, hate, hate it.
I fell into the LOVE IT camp because it was unique and different. I thought it made the B9 Tribeca stand out and it looked much sportier than Subies of the past. This styling was also mated to the last two years of the old Impreza body style. Again, I loved the aviator look on the Impreza.
Apparently, the powers that be at Subaru have listened to the haters out there for the 2008 model year because they turned the Tribeca into a Chrysler Pacifica. All you haters… rejoice! Subaru has effectively turned the cool-looking Tribeca front-end into a Chrysler Pacifica. Take a look for yourself… the styling is eerily similar.
2006 Subaru B9 Tribeca
2008 Subaru Tribeca (no more B9 necessary)
2008 Chrysler Pacifica
So, all you haters can now be satisfied… you effectively took a unique and cool-looking vehicle and turned it into one of the most vanilla, “me too” vehicles on the road. I wouldn’t be surprised if Subaru sells even fewer of the new Tribeca as a result.
What are your thoughts? Am I completely off my rocker here? Did you like the old B9 Tribeca’s styling or hate it?
May 29, 2008 - 7:12 am - posted by Brig Graff
I liked the old front end of the tribeca, but hated the back end. It had a swooped look that looked like it was trying too hard.
May 29, 2008 - 7:14 am - posted by Brig Graff
the thing I wish is that the Saab cars that are built on Subie platforms are not AWD, which is a shame. I heard that one of the Saab Aero trims will be AWD soon, but I think any of the Saab wagons should be AWD just like the Subies from which they are built.
May 29, 2008 - 8:28 am - posted by Jason Mitchell
I agree with you on the front end/back end deal. The old front with the new back would be ideal. I didn’t hate the old back end, it just was well… trying too hard (as you said).
And regarding Saab’s built on Subie platforms… I don’t believe that’s the case. Subaru built the Saab 92x, which is no longer in the lineup. I don’t believe that any other vehicles were built on Subaru platforms now or in the past.
They may, however, license the Subaru AWD technology, which Subaru has done with other manufacturers since theirs is so dialed.
Subaru just needs to get on with making hybrids and bringing diesel’s to the States. Now that Subaru is partly-owned by Toyota, they could use Toyota’s hybrid technology pretty easily and have an awesome one-two punch with their AWD and Toyota’s hybrid synergy drive. But, again… not like I’m in the market for a $35k vehicle right now anyway.
May 30, 2008 - 8:12 am - posted by Brig Graff
yeah, the other thing with new hybrids is this:
It takes SO MUCH coal-powered energy to build a brand new hybrid car (producing the battery, etc) that you have to drive a new hybrid thousands & thousands & thousands of miles before the savings in gasoline makes the car carbon-neutral with other new cars. In fact, it takes less energy to produce a Hummer than to produce a Prius.
And even non-hybrid new cars have a loooooong ways to drive before the energy used to build them (welders, refining, power tools, etc, etc) is made up for because of the increased fuel efficiency over your old SUV.
If you’re talking the environment, the BEST thing you can do is just not increase demand for new cars. Even if your old SUV doesn’t get ideal gas mileage, it’s still better to keep nursing it along than to put out demand for another brand-new car to be built. The best car for the environment is a used car.
There’s also the false economy of buying a new hybrid — how long do you have to drive it before the savings in gas make the $20-30k price tag break even with just driving a car that’s already paid off?
So if you drive an old ‘94 Geo Metro, which gets roughly the same mileage as a brand-new Prius, then the energy that was spent building that car is long-gone and the hybrid will never catch up to the Metro in terms of carbon neutrality.
May 30, 2008 - 8:19 am - posted by Jason Mitchell
You are totally right on that one… the carbon footprint of a new vehicle is huge–no matter how good the MPG is. But, if you are going to buy a new vehicle, it does feel nice to get the best MPG possible. The smartest thing to do is buy a late-model used car, that’s for sure.
June 7, 2008 - 11:35 am - posted by Martin
I totally agree. In fact I think couple years down the line 2006 B9’s may be desired and viewed as a “collectible” item. The 2008 is just another model in the mass. The classic 2006 stands out big time and you can recognize it from a mile away. Just like the old Honda Insight or the ugly Harley’s are desirable, so will the 2006 in few years. As a matter a fact, a firend that works at a Subaru dealer that I bought my Tribeca in 2006 said that people often ask about the previous styling and are pushed away by the new look.