Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Subaru Crosstrek any good?

I believe it might, also. As for acceleration I my Rav is very snappy for a 4 cylinder.

What trash talk, dumb-dumb ?

Drive whatever makes you hard, IDGAF

🦫

I bought my wife a 2019 Outback a few years ago because the driver's assist was the best one I had tried among Toyota, Honda, Chevy, GMC, Buick, Hyundai, and Ford. Remsen's criticism seems to be based exclusively on the Lane Keeping Assist. He didn't describe a problem with blind spot warning indicators, rear cross traffic alert, lane departure warning or the collision avoidance. Also, his criticism seems to be based on an earlier version of Subaru's Eyesight system. Subaru introduced Eyesight in 2008, version 2 in 2010, then they upgraded it again in 2017. They introduced the newest version in 2020 but I don't know the details of which models and model years have that version. I know it's called Eyesight X and is available in Europe's Levorg model but maybe not in the US until MY2022.

My wife's MY2019 has the 2017 version of Eyesight and I find it to work near flawlessly -- but I do not expect it to drive the car without my hands on the wheel. It is not a pseudo-self-driving technology like Tesla's. Personally the feature I find most useful is the adaptive cruise control. Nevertheless, look at this Insurance Institute for Highway Safety white paper: https://www.iihs.org/media/e8f617a5...search/Bulletins/hldi_bulletin_34.39.pdf It shows a 36% decrease in bodily-injury only insurance claims across all Subaru models equipped with Eyesight.

Subaru's Eyesight is a mature technology that's proven to work well. I replaced my wife's Mercedes with a car equipped with it primarily because of that fact. Are there better systems? No doubt there will be, and even Subaru's own Eyesight X is a contender for that. If there is another system available now that is meaningfully better, it is not likely to be on a car priced around $30K.

With that said, I can also tell you I don't particularly care for the Subaru, my wife's car, myself. I realize now it's probably because I'm not a lesbian. Seriously, I drive a much older vehicle and prefer that immensely, but my personal preference aside, I have driven a wide variety of late-model rentals while traveling which I think gives a better impression than just a test drive. By wide variety, I don't just mean make and model, but everything from European sports sedans, to minivans, Suburbans and Expedition XL's to Camaro convertibles and so on. The Subaru gives up handling for ground clearance. This is true both of the Outback and the Crosstrek. I would have preferred a Legacy wagon rather than the Outback. I have a 4x4 for high ground clearance so the Subaru's doesn't do anything for us. We do drive it on snow in the mountains but not offroad. Our Mercedes with the 4-matic and ESP does everything the Subaru can do in that respect and it handles much better. If there are large obstacles to clear, I will take the 4x4 that I've personally driven the Rubicon trail with.

So I give a big thumbs up for Subaru's current version of Eyesight. As for the cars themselves, there's a lot of personal preference and use-case involved. I don't particularly care for mine, but I didn't buy it for myself.

What’s with all the computer assisted bullshidt? Parking? Close vehicles? If you aren’t in control of your faculties to drive, literally operate a vehicle without computer assisted crap, why the hell are you on the road?

I'm driving a 2 year old outback with 108K miles on it. I also know several guys who drive the Rav4.

Seems to me that the formerly tiny Rav4 has grown into a bigger machine. As has the 4Runner. Seems like the newer Rav4s are almost the size of the older 4Runners

New Rav4s are good looking cars. In my mind, it and a number of other cars have been redesigned to look like the Outback. Maybe to cash in on the Outbacks wild selling success?
I think the newer Rav4 looks better than the Outback.

Locally, Subarus as a whole own the new car market. In 3 years they've gone from occasionally seen to ubiquitous.

It is almost impossible, however, to find a used one.

Ours was a 2018.

I have no interest in drivers' assistance tech in general. We had the first version of Autopilot on our 2014 Tesla and it was a fun gimmick for a bit, but totally worthless for anything other than scaring people. The Subaru's version is more advanced than the first generation of Autopilot, but that's all I can say positive about it. There was a serious problem with phantom braking in that Outback (where the emergency braking activates even though there's no reason for it) and the lane keeping was on the level of a drunk driver's skills.

You want to know what fear is, have your car slam on its brakes at 80 mph when there's nothing in front of you but cars behind you.

Again, I don't need or want drivers' assistance tech and the only type of that stuff I find useful on long drives is the traffic aware cruise control (that is what Tesla called it, not sure what the Eyesight version is called). On long trips, it can be a real plus, as it keeps you from rearending anyone if you aren't paying attention.

It's not that simple. If people on the road never made mistakes, then there wouldn't be value to any of this, but people do make mistakes, even people that are in control of all their faculties and that are highly trained and skillful. Because we're not actually perfect, it's just a matter of time. It's been well demonstrated that the computers are not perfect but they're closer than most people. Using computers to assist people is the sensible solution given the present technology. It's done nearly universally in commercial aviation. It's also proven to be effective for automobiles, as I cited above in the IIHS study that showed an average 36% reduction in bodily-injury only claims. Not only does this technology protect the occupants of the vehicle equipped with it, but it can also protect people in other vehicles from a mistake the driver of an equipped vehicle might make.

While I can appreciate the 'purity' of operating a vehicle without computer assistance including ABS or an automatic transmission or even electronic fuel injection, I recognize this is a personal preference that isn't shared by everyone. Not everyone has the same skill levels or experience. I have an elderly parent (80's) that's not incompentent to drive. In fact, he's been driving since he was 13 when he would regularly drive the jeep on the farm by himself. 70 years of driving and he's never been in a single collision, not even a fender bender. He lived most his life in an urban area too with a heavy commute. He recognizes he's not as sharp as he was and wants these driver aides so he got a car with them (not a Subaru). Seems pretty sensible to me and telling him he can't drive anymore would not be as rational. My wife benefits from them too. She simply has little driving experience -- almost 20 years less than I do and we're the same age. She's never driven a commute so she only ever drives irregularly. She has been highly trained, but does not practice regularly. She's also never been in a collision of any kind. Even so, driver aides are a rational solution for her. Then there's my teen sons. If they drive anything like I did, they'll need this stuff and then some until they're at least 25.

Personally, I share your disdain for this tech. I don't have a commute and I drive mostly for pleasure. I prefer to drive myself. But I do see the value of it. I suppose the same will be accounted to fully-computer driven cars as well. No doubt many will find them useful, but I decry the prospect that alternatives like the self-driven cars, that is the cars we drive ourselves, will be prohibited.

Get her a Hyundai Santa Fe. All the above plus a 10 year 100k mi warranty