[SkyHigh]

Help!

In big dilemma between new 9th gen Accord and redesigned 2015 Subaru Outback.

For ex- Subaru owners, why did you switch to Honda?

Anyone own(ed) both?

This will be a family car with two little boys.

Thanks!

 

[Atarian]

Friend at work with exact same dilemma. Eliminated Camry and Altima first. Subaru was slower and the interior not as nice (not my words). Added complexity of AWD if you don't need it. I added that mainly hippies drive Subarus which was probably not helpful, but not entirely inaccurate. He has still not decided but is 'leaning towards Accord'. The 4-banger.

They are both fine cars that will last a long time and serve you well. Where I live the extra maintenance costs of AWD and mileage penalty are not worth it. If I lived in Canadia it would be different.

 

[ajvester]

Help!

In big dilemma between new 9th gen Accord and redesigned 2015 Subaru Outback.

For ex- Subaru owners, why did you switch to Honda?

Anyone own(ed) both?

This will be a family car with two little boys.

Thanks!

I just switched to an Accord EX CVT.

I bought a Subaru new in 2007 with intentions of keeping it to 150K+ miles. However at 100K miles, many small issues were starting to $100 me to death. Then, it developed a cooling problem that 3 shops could not figure out. Traded it in while I still had some equity because I couldn't trust it anymore.

I don't have a lot of experience with the Honda dealer yet, but every Subaru dealer I went to was horrible. Subaru of America was not much help either. I like Subaru vehicles, but did not buy another mainly because of the dealer experience and second because of long term durability concerns.

 

[lebowski]

My Subarus haven't been as reliable as my Hondas, but they are far more versatile given their wagon type layout and the best AWD system available anywhere. Choose based on your anticipated needs. In our case the boys liked to ski in the Sierras and so Subaru it was. They've since become Army officers and moved away and so we went with the Accord to try something new. Both of the boys still own Subarus as they better complement their lifestyles. We're happy with the Accord but I sure miss the Subarus.

 

[Losttekniqs]

I miss owning a Subaru.

 

[Mechanic]

SkyHigh, I gave the Roo boys a HARD look recently until I spent a good bit of time reading their boards. I came to believe that the vast majority of Roo owners have mostly trouble-free cars but a significant percentage don't. And I'm not talking about your typical irritating the-power-window-won't-roll-up or I-can't-program-my-phone, either. I'm talking engine failures. Catastrophic engine failures. Who the hell has engine failures these days? Only two manufacturers: Porsche (and after 12 years they finally redesigned their engines) and Roo. And it's the same inherent issue for both manufacturers, interestingly -- cylinder heads & engine blocks. Which isn't all that surprising, I guess, since the two have the same basis engine design: a "flat" engine with horizontally-opposed pistons running in cylinders "added" to a central case.

But they do have better TV ads, I'll give them that. Lots of warm, friendly family stuff. Baked cookies and daughters learning to drive. And they do build safe cars. But I migrated to Honda years ago because I wanted an inexpensive daily driver I could use when my other cars (German) were dead. And it was at that point 30+ years ago that I discovered how good Honda's quality-control programs are. Do they build perfect cars? No, of course not. But Honda is pretty damn good at manufacturing cars, and the odds that you'll get a good one are (IMHO, of course) much higher.

 

[Markus]

SkyHigh, I gave the Roo boys a HARD look recently until I spent a good bit of time reading their boards. I came to believe that the vast majority of Roo owners have mostly trouble-free cars but a significant percentage don't. And I'm not talking about your typical irritating the-power-window-won't-roll-up or I-can't-program-my-phone, either. I'm talking engine failures. Catastrophic engine failures. Who the hell has engine failures these days? Only two manufacturers: Porsche (and after 12 years they finally redesigned their engines) and Roo. And it's the same inherent issue for both manufacturers, interestingly -- cylinder heads & engine blocks. Which isn't all that surprising, I guess, since the two have the same basis engine design: a "flat" engine with horizontally-opposed pistons running in cylinders "added" to a central case.

But they do have better TV ads, I'll give them that. Lots of warm, friendly family stuff. Baked cookies and daughters learning to drive. And they do build safe cars. But I migrated to Honda years ago because I wanted an inexpensive daily driver I could use when my other cars (German) were dead. And it was at that point 30+ years ago that I discovered how good Honda's quality-control programs are. Do they build perfect cars? No, of course not. But Honda is pretty damn good at manufacturing cars, and the odds that you'll get a good one are (IMHO, of course) much higher.

I guess you don't consider having to replace rings in the Honda V6 VCM engines as engine failures. I do. So we can add Honda to the list of automakers that have engine failures.

 

[gk26]

I was considering a Forester, but the FB-25 engine has oil-burning issues. Not every unit, but enough units that I did not want to take the chance. That engine is found in the Outback, Forester, Legacy and Impreza
See
http://www.subaruforester.org/vbulletin/f151/has-oil-consumption-problem-been-fixed-140849/
and more importantly, http://www.subaruforester.org/vbulletin/f183/2011-excessive-oil-consumption-merged-thread-119562/


As someone else said, they are hippie cars too, more often than not. There are many examples in Colorado to prove that statement.

 

[Metal Metalic]

My Subarus haven't been as reliable as my Hondas, but they are far more versatile given their wagon type layout and the best AWD system available anywhere. Choose based on your anticipated needs. In our case the boys liked to ski in the Sierras and so Subaru it was. They've since become Army officers and moved away and so we went with the Accord to try something new. Both of the boys still own Subarus as they better complement their lifestyles. We're happy with the Accord but I sure miss the Subarus.

Subaru, have an 2011 Outback with CVT. Has 40,000 Miles and is Certified. One thing with Certified cars, is Honda is reactive in updating PCM/ECU and other components only if there is an issue during certification. Subaru is proactive in certification. Our Subaru dealer, found a few TSB updates that are not part of the certification, and installed updated components for longevity of the Outback.

One of the major updates is all Subaru Boxter 4 engines since 2010 now come with turbo head gaskets. As there were a number of oil/coolent leaks reported at the heads. So if you want to turbo your boxter later, just add the components and ECU.

As for peeps comparing Accord to Outback, they are completely off their trolly... two diff cars, for two diff purposes.

The Outback is heavy... I mean heavy!!! Though the CVT and engine combo does well in the mountains and is one of the highest MPG SUV cars on the market. The only complaints from Subaru owners is the generation has pulled away from sports wagon into the big and less sporty SUV class. Though you can get the Boxter Turbo or HO Boxter 6 versions with manual.

One thing for being heavy, Subaru added a 2:1 torque converter with their CVT which allows better pulling and HD longevity of their CVT. Honda does not produce a HD CVT and there is no long term data on Hondas CVT platform.

 

[Mechanic]

I guess you don't consider having to replace rings in the Honda V6 VCM engines as engine failures. I do. . . .

No, I don't. It's one thing for an engine series to have "issues" -- and, IMHO, excessive oil consumption which may result in re-ringing a V-6 engine -- is an issue, not a catastrophic engine failure. And damn few V-6s end up being re-ringed, btw, but you know that already. That is the "ultimate" fix if a host of other procedures fail to correct the oil-consumption problem. Moreover, most of those problems can be traced to miserable maintenance histories, truth be told. Roo engines, on the other hand, literally explode, as in rod-through-the-side-of-the-block. Same with Porsche's IMS failures. One minute you are motoring along, the next minute you are picking up shrapnel. Excessive oil consumption, even when it occurs, isn't comparable.

. . . As for peeps comparing Accord to Outback, they are completely off their trolly... two diff cars, for two diff purposes. . . .

Yep, I agree, FWIW.

 

[Baldeagle]

Subaru makes good cars. Great reputation for satisfied owners. But why compare the Accord sedan to the Outback. Wouldn’t Honda’s CRV be a better cross-shop? Wagon to wagon. AWD to AWD. If you like manual transmissions, Subaru is one of the few manufacturers that offers one in a station wagon. That could be a big plus. However their 2.5 flat-four produces much less power than Honda’s 2.4-I4. And if you compare an Outback to the Accord, their 2.0-turbo won’t compare to Honda’s 3.5-liter V6. However Subi's 2.0-turbo verses Honda's 2.4-I4 may be a tougher call. I'd take Honda's N/A I4 for simplicity. Subaru has some pretty cool electronic safety features, but they get costly and in my opinion are designed for brain dead drivers. If you need those features you shouldn’t be driving. I like the wagon idea for a family, but then again I'd be thinking CRV for Honda.

 

[wickedfx]

I had a 14 wrx limited. I know it was not the sti, but man I loved that car so much. Yes it was fun, an awesome, and looked great, but there was one big thing I hated. The technology inside the car is like the very first 350Z, compared to a Lexus. The accord has all of the technology features you could ever want. Unless subaru now has the same technology features as an accord, I can't justify going back. I know an outback is different, so if an outback has those features, then choose what you like better.

 

[Typhoon]

Help!

Anyone own(ed) both?

This will be a family car with two little boys.

We've had Hondas for a long time ('88 and '03 Accords, '00 Odyssey). When we look for a new car, it's a Honda unless there's some compelling reason to look elsewhere.

When our '00 Odyssey reached the end of its useful life (200k) in early 2013, we needed a new hauler and my wife did not want another minivan. I wanted AWD and as much carrying capacity as possible in a smaller vehicle. We looked at the CRV, then at its clones (Rav4, Escape, Forester) and the Outback. None of the small SUVs, including the CRV, were particularly appealing. The Outback seemed to fit our needs quite well and, on top of that, my brother has had two Outbacks and has been very pleased with them, particularly their reliability. We got a 2013 Outback (4-cylinder, mid-level trim).

Shortly after that, our '03 Accord gave up its life for our daughter (she didn't have even a scratch but the car was most certainly done). Again, we looked at the competition, this time for an Accord-size family sedan. We considered the Mazda 6 and the Fusion in addition to the Accord but it wasn't even close -- we got a 2013 Accord EX-L (4 cylinder) in late 2013.

Off the top of my head, here are some of the strengths and weaknesses of the two...

Accord
-------
27.1 MPG over 15k miles
The CVT is so good that I would not be aware it was a CVT unless you told me
Handling is a delight -- it drives like an Accord
Absolutely horrible front passenger seat for me (6'0"). There is no thigh support and no way to tilt the seat to create some.
Some very cool gizmos (FCW, right lane camera, mileage history, etc.)
Zero repair issues so far

Outback
-------
31.7 MPG over 20k miles
Very in-your-face CVT. If I had driven it not knowing that it was a CVT, I would have said, "What the heck is going on in the transmission?!"
Very peculiar throttle response when starting up. Very hard to start smoothly. All drivers of the car have noticed this, so it's not just me.
Much heavier steering than the Accord. In comparison, feels a bit like a truck.
Superbly comfortable seats, including the back seat which was way, way better than any of the small SUV competitors. All positions are much better than the Accord.
Very good cargo room for its size
Excellent AWD
Zero repair issues so far. (I read the Outback forum and disagree with a previous poster -- I don't see significant reliability issues with current Outbacks.)

When you drive the Accord and Outback, pay particular attention to seat comfort issues as well as the CVT and throttle differences. For us, the front passenger seat comfort is so different that we would probably take the Outback rather than the Accord on a very long trip.

Bottom line? We're extremely happy with both decisions but for very different reasons. My wife, who really disliked using the Odyssey (because of its size and appearance) is very happy driving the Outback.

I wouldn't normally think of the Accord and the Outback as competitors, but they are for you and that's what matters. They're very different cars but, in my (still limited) experience, are both are very good.

Typhoon

 

[fizmixa]

read this the other day and found it interesting: http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2014/07/18/subaru-oil-burner-lawsuit/12859865/

i've never owned a subaru so i cannot comment.

 

[jerhu]

I had an STI before the Accord and i'd probably go back to the Subaru. After switching to the accord I realized how much I valued the AWD. Needless to say now i've gotten rid of the Accord and picked up an AWD vehicle again.

I also bought my in laws the new Impreza and would probably take that over the accord as well despite the CVT being a lot louder than that of the Accord.

 

[acomp182]

As a former Subaru impreza owner, the best part was the awd system. What I wasn't crazy about is the performance and interior. Cheap feeling and lack of gizmos compared to the accord. If you live in an area with a lot of snow, I think its worth it.

 

[Markus]

No, I don't. It's one thing for an engine series to have "issues" -- and, IMHO, excessive oil consumption which may result in re-ringing a V-6 engine -- is an issue, not a catastrophic engine failure. And damn few V-6s end up being re-ringed, btw, but you know that already. That is the "ultimate" fix if a host of other procedures fail to correct the oil-consumption problem. Moreover, most of those problems can be traced to miserable maintenance histories, truth be told. Roo engines, on the other hand, literally explode, as in rod-through-the-side-of-the-block. Same with Porsche's IMS failures. One minute you are motoring along, the next minute you are picking up shrapnel. Excessive oil consumption, even when it occurs, isn't comparable.

When the rings need to be replaced the engine internals have failed. Plain and simple. Maybe it's not a catastrophic failure, but it's a failure that needs a mechanic to fix. Fact is Honda does make engines that fail, contrary to your assertion. Even the I4 of the 8th gen Accord has failures. Several people on this very forum have had their 8th gen I4 engines replaced. So let's not pretend all is rosy with Honda.

And the Porsche engines you are referring to had issues from 1997-2008. Honda engines have had much more recent issues.

 

[Kamdog]

I had an Outback, and it was rife with quality issues. It was a '98, and I had to replace every seal, developed a fuel injector leak, had a bolt break on the belt tensioner, and very early clutch wear.

It was, however, the best foul weather car, and nothing could hold it down.

 

[Honda86]

I was looking into the 2013 wrx sti when I ended up buying my accord. It's a wicked fun car but just didn't feel like it was me. The accord is fully loaded with comfy heated leather seats and all the tech you need. Each their own though, there are some nice affordable cars out there.

 

[cintocrunch]

This is an interesting thread since I just spent a week in a 2013 Outback Premium rental. Below are my observations:

-Comfortable, surprisingly comfortable on big potholes and bumps.
-NA 2.5 with CVT does very well in normal driving, this thing is slow when you need to get up and go (like highway on ramps with 70 mpg speed limits and slow Ohiotards in front of you).
-The boxer engines sound horrendous! My lawn mower sounds more refined. Especially cold starts or the CVT keeping RPM's above 3k, the sound was unbearable.
-This thing has a huge cargo hold, I could hold one of the big dog strollers, 2 large suitcases and a bunch of other carry on bags in the back.
-The electronic parking brake is a gimmicky, annoying pile of garbage. Give me a damn lever that I can press or a handbrake. It was slow to respond so I had to constantly reengage a different gear or park to get it to engage or disengage.

All in all, I came away pretty impressed but not totally sold. I've driven the new Accords and prefer them. I would like to give an Outback Premium 6MT a shot though, lighter weight for the same motor, no electronic parking brake, etc.