Author Topic: CTC Review: 2008 Subaru Tribeca (Read 26928 times)

Dante · « **Reply #40 on:** July 18, 2007, 09:48:09 am »

I think the DRL are good enough for NORMAL weather conditions. Some sort of DRLs for the taillights (low-voltage) wouldn't hurt either. I believe in Europe they have this regulation in place so some European models may have rear lights as DRLs as well.
However, I think the Auto ON/OFF lights should be mandated (for me it's an important feature in a car, and this is where my initial question came from) as safety issue to avoid people driving in the dark without lights.
Auto OFF lights it's just a half-way solution to protect mostly the car, not necessarily the driver (unless you drive with your headlights on all the time).
In my experience, although I have Auto ON/OFF lights, I found that there are times like heavy rain, fog, snow (in the daylight) when I need to manually turn my lights on because the sensor doesn't adjust very well to this type of conditions.

carcrazed · « **Reply #41 on:** July 18, 2007, 03:27:02 pm »

I'm with you carcrazy, it's a MUST HAVE on every new car.
I hate it when people drive (especially dark coloured cars) without their headlights on right after sunset.. what're they smoking!?!?
Props for Mazda for having Auto lights even in Mazda3.

geoff_m@shaw.ca · « **Reply #42 on:** July 18, 2007, 05:10:10 pm »

Just to be a stickler, I'll point out that contrary to the article's description, the windshield rake isn't steep at all. It's the opposite of steep. A shallow rake.

But I see what you mean, and as a tall guy I appreciate the critique.

wing · « **Reply #43 on:** July 18, 2007, 05:30:13 pm »

Shallow eh? Hmmm I guess you are right....

carcrazed · « **Reply #44 on:** July 19, 2007, 08:50:30 am »

Hank, I guess you're loving the headroom in your Subaru eh? How's she holding up?
Does she run well like she looks?

Mistermeow · « **Reply #45 on:** July 19, 2007, 11:55:23 am »

Boy the new Tribeca really looks like a chrysler with that front grill treatment.

geoff_m@shaw.ca · « **Reply #46 on:** July 19, 2007, 02:09:43 pm »

Quote from: carcrazed on July 19, 2007, 08:50:30 am

Hank, I guess you're loving the headroom in your Subaru eh? How's she holding up?
Does she run well like she looks?

Runs great, thanks for asking.

I drove it up to Edmonton last weekend and got caught on the way back in a pretty nasty hailstorm (think of a Mentos blizzard). Had to pull over for 15 minutes, but there was no damage to the car. Washed the bugs of my winders though.

Dante · « **Reply #47 on:** July 19, 2007, 10:06:28 pm »

What would be Tribeca's competition? I would guess for around $40K+, 7-seat CUVs: Veracruz, Highlander, CX9, Pilot. But on the other hand, for the 5-seats, could it be: Santa Fe, Murano, Edge? The trouble I see is that it is priced to high for what it is in either category.

wing · « **Reply #48 on:** July 19, 2007, 10:14:09 pm »

I believe Subaru compares themselves with MDX

2JDM · « **Reply #49 on:** July 19, 2007, 10:36:49 pm »

Quote from: wing on July 19, 2007, 10:14:09 pm

I believe Subaru compares themselves with MDX

I like the Tribeca, but I'd get a MDX over a Tribeca anyday.

Dante · « **Reply #50 on:** July 19, 2007, 10:37:25 pm »

Quote from: wing on July 19, 2007, 10:14:09 pm

I believe Subaru compares themselves with MDX

First of, Acura is a premium/near-luxury brand which Subaru it is not. I'm not seeing too many luxury buyers considering a rather bland CUV with a great 4WD. This is the same as Hyundai dreaming that the Veracruz competes with the RX350 just because they loaded it with all possible options and selling for a fraction of the RX350's price.

wing · « **Reply #51 on:** July 19, 2007, 10:39:01 pm »

Talk to Subaru not me, I totally agree. I see the CX-7 as competition.

ovr50 · « **Reply #52 on:** July 19, 2007, 11:05:58 pm »

Quote from: carcrazy on July 19, 2007, 10:37:25 pm

Quote from: wing on July 19, 2007, 10:14:09 pm
I believe Subaru compares themselves with MDX

First of, Acura is a premium/near-luxury brand which Subaru it is not. I'm not seeing too many luxury buyers considering a rather bland CUV with a great 4WD. This is the same as Hyundai dreaming that the Veracruz competes with the RX350 just because they loaded it with all possible options and selling for a fraction of the RX350's price.

I agree, Subaru does NOT compete against Acura. Wrong marque, guys. They may think that, but that is not reality in the majority of buyer's minds IMO.

Dante · « **Reply #53 on:** July 19, 2007, 11:31:58 pm »

Quote from: wing on July 19, 2007, 10:39:01 pm

Talk to Subaru not me, I totally agree. I see the CX-7 as competition.

Sorry, but I did not question what you said as I understood it's Subaru's claim and not yours. I was just disagreeing with the point of view.

inco · « **Reply #54 on:** July 20, 2007, 06:10:14 am »

I think that the RDX and Tribeca are within a few bucks of each other and I would take the Tribeca over the RDX. Bigger engine, regular fuel, more spacious and tried and true AWD system. I know SHAWD is good and I won't argue as to which system is better.

However when you hit that price point you also have to add other choices and that list is growing. The new Kia Sorento gets up there with the highline version and you have all the GM choices - Acadia

, Outlook, Enclave and then toss in Highlander, the new one and Murano and the Vera Cruz.

So many choices and if space is a requirement, the RDX is the smallest of them all.

Blueprint · « **Reply #55 on:** July 20, 2007, 07:46:57 am »

MDX, inco, not RDX ! MDX rides on the Odyssey's platform, RDX on the CR-V's.

ovr50 · « **Reply #56 on:** July 20, 2007, 10:27:55 am »

Quote from: Blueprint on July 20, 2007, 07:46:57 am

MDX, inco, not RDX ! MDX rides on the Odyssey's platform, RDX on the CR-V's.

Actually, inco is correct in that the price of the RDX and the Tribeca are close. The MDX is well over $50K and can get to $60K with navi and other tidbits (the Elite pkg). The RDX is $41K base plus freight/PDI, the "Tech" pkg adds another $4K.

From a handling POV, IMO the RDX will run circles around a Tribeca. I would buy a RDX to have a "fun" crossover, I wouldn't buy the Tribeca for that reason. I don't think ppl are buying the RDX for "space", they are buying it because it's more fun to drive than most other crossovers, and does offer more space than a sedan or wagon. That's my take on it.

inco · « **Reply #57 on:** July 20, 2007, 10:35:01 am »

Point well taken Ovr and I'll concede that it likely would be more fun to drive than any of the others.

For me though the two killers against it are Turbo and Premium. One goes around and the other goes up. Making an engine do more with a Turbo works, but it has it's own drawbacks and limitations and eventually wear. The engine has to work that much harder and so I prefer to keep the revs down and have it last longer. But that's me.

sirAQUAMAN64 · « **Reply #58 on:** July 20, 2007, 12:19:03 pm »

Murano is closest competitor to my eyes, and the outgoing Highlander.

I've seen a few new Tribecas in my area... maybe the restyle will help them out?

DJ · « **Reply #59 on:** August 19, 2007, 03:11:04 pm »

Just purchased the 2008 Tribeca Limited last week and have to say it is beautiful to drive, coming in at the same price as last years model made the decision easy. Great vehicle, comfortable, solid, lots of room, handles beautifully on the roads and night driving is a dream with the headlights. Everyone that has seen ours has fallen in love with it.

Author Topic: CTC Review: 2008 Subaru Tribeca (Read 26928 times)

geoff_m@shaw.ca

Mistermeow

geoff_m@shaw.ca

DJ