So bloat it up like the Accord, Camry and now Mazda6? I'm average height and can sit behind myself with no issues. Compared to pretty much any "family" car of the 1980's it's very roomy.
If Subie needs a larger car they should introduce a new model. Maybe re-body the Camry and slap an awd system under it for the broad of beam.
[/quote]
Why do you assume that anyone who complains about interior room is fat?
The problem was not the width of the car. Heck, the problem wasn't the length of the car either. It was inefficient packaging that reduced the effective legroom, front and rear.
First problem: in my Legacy, you couldn't put your feet under either of the front buckets. This means that even though the distance from the front buckets to the rear bench was roughly the same as in a Jetta, the effective rear seat legroom was about eight inches less. In the back seat of the Jetta, my thighs rest on the bench. In the Legacy, my upper legs were lifted off the bench, knees raised toward my chest by a couple inches.
Second problem: the front passenger footwell rose to meet the underside of the glove compartment too early. So while the seat itself was the same length to the glove compartment as in the Jetta (roughly), it felt much tighter.
Third problem: the seating was pretty low, overall. Less like sitting in a chair than my Jetta. This made you have to push your legs further forward (less of you're leg's length is used up vertically), exacerbating the above two problems.
If they raised the roof on the Legacy a couple inches, raised the seating (front and rear) a couple inches, made sure rear passengers could put their feet under the front buckets, and redesigned the front passenger footwell, I think the car would be just fine, size-wise. It'd still be smaller than it's midsize comptetitors, and still uncomfortably close in size to the new Impreza, but those changes would answer
my complaints about interior space.
