Considering Legacy Estate DIESEL!
21 June 2008, 04:32 PM
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: .........
Posts: 5,968
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Considering Legacy Estate DIESEL!
Hey,
Been hearing some good things about the new Boxer Diesel, and I'm thinking of maybe getting one for the "Boss" (aka wife).
Anyone here driven/got one?
(Puts on flame retardant suit)
Been hearing some good things about the new Boxer Diesel, and I'm thinking of maybe getting one for the "Boss" (aka wife).
Anyone here driven/got one?
(Puts on flame retardant suit)
21 June 2008, 06:48 PM
#6
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: .........
Posts: 5,968
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Copied this from TG:
"There's more similarity than you might imagine between Mazda and Subaru. Yes, yes, both are Japanese, but that's not the issue here.
They've both persevered over the last few years with a USP so tricky it would've seen many a rival call it a day and head forlornly home. In Mazda's case, it's the Wankel rotary engine, for Subaru it's the boxer layout. Both are seriously compromised, but also make for sweetly characterful cars.
There was a point when those of us who care were really worried about Subaru, because the boxer engine is just too inefficient to be a success in diesel-obsessed Europe.
But it's sighs of relief all round - not only has Subaru done a diesel, it's done a boxer diesel. If you bear in mind the company only sells 50,000 cars a year in Europe, building an entirely new engine represents a serious commitment.
I've been really looking forward to this Legacy because it's something truly new, not just a rehashed marketing concept. But, as with meeting your childhood heroes, there's a fear factor - what if the engine doesn't match up to the boxer legend? What if, despite the unique layout, which does away with the need for balancer shafts and allows for a shorter crank shaft, the refinement still falls short?
Ah, stop fretting. It's awesome. It has got to be the smoothest diesel engine yet developed, to the point where you can't even feel any vibrations coming through the gearstick. Sure, there's a bit of rattle at cold and idle (another boxer characteristic), but after that, it feels just like a petrol, with perhaps a smidge less throttle adjustability.
Of course, there are criticisms, but none are about the engineering. It could be a little quicker, but the turbo's on song when you need it, and it's comfortably as fast as a diesel Mondeo.
Which brings us neatly to the crux of the matter - the Mondeo is the Legacy's spiritual squeeze, not the beloved memory of the Scoob-of-the-same-name first campaigned by Colin McRae. It's really, really good, but you need to get out of the Subaru mindset to really enjoy it. It's no rally car.
So, although the Legacy carries an awful lot of baggage, both literal and emotional, you shouldn't lose sight of the blissful underlying truth: this is as good as diesel ever gets. "
Sounds good, with a remap it should be even better!
"There's more similarity than you might imagine between Mazda and Subaru. Yes, yes, both are Japanese, but that's not the issue here.
They've both persevered over the last few years with a USP so tricky it would've seen many a rival call it a day and head forlornly home. In Mazda's case, it's the Wankel rotary engine, for Subaru it's the boxer layout. Both are seriously compromised, but also make for sweetly characterful cars.
There was a point when those of us who care were really worried about Subaru, because the boxer engine is just too inefficient to be a success in diesel-obsessed Europe.
But it's sighs of relief all round - not only has Subaru done a diesel, it's done a boxer diesel. If you bear in mind the company only sells 50,000 cars a year in Europe, building an entirely new engine represents a serious commitment.
I've been really looking forward to this Legacy because it's something truly new, not just a rehashed marketing concept. But, as with meeting your childhood heroes, there's a fear factor - what if the engine doesn't match up to the boxer legend? What if, despite the unique layout, which does away with the need for balancer shafts and allows for a shorter crank shaft, the refinement still falls short?
Ah, stop fretting. It's awesome. It has got to be the smoothest diesel engine yet developed, to the point where you can't even feel any vibrations coming through the gearstick. Sure, there's a bit of rattle at cold and idle (another boxer characteristic), but after that, it feels just like a petrol, with perhaps a smidge less throttle adjustability.
Of course, there are criticisms, but none are about the engineering. It could be a little quicker, but the turbo's on song when you need it, and it's comfortably as fast as a diesel Mondeo.
Which brings us neatly to the crux of the matter - the Mondeo is the Legacy's spiritual squeeze, not the beloved memory of the Scoob-of-the-same-name first campaigned by Colin McRae. It's really, really good, but you need to get out of the Subaru mindset to really enjoy it. It's no rally car.
So, although the Legacy carries an awful lot of baggage, both literal and emotional, you shouldn't lose sight of the blissful underlying truth: this is as good as diesel ever gets. "
Sounds good, with a remap it should be even better!
Trending Topics
21 June 2008, 07:50 PM
#9
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 387
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Financially doesn't make a lot of sense when you can get brand new 2 litre petrol sport tourers for £15k - so save £5k. Yes you'll be paying out more on petrol, probably about 6 pence per mile incl extra road tax but you'll need to do about 80,000 miles in the diesel before you start to make savings over the petrol model. You'll lose more of your money on depreciation with the diesel over a 3 year period than the petrol version so it doesn't make a lot of sense!!!!
22 June 2008, 03:58 AM
#12
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: .........
Posts: 5,968
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah, ok here in the south of Europe a fully equipped Legacy Estate costs 40,000 Euros after tax.
The 3.0R costs something like 62,000 Euros or more, the 2.0 I dont even know how much it is because it is so wimpy (we dont get STis Legacys here).
98 petrol goes for 1,67 Euros, diesel for 1,55 Euros or something of the sort.
We have still have not overtaken the petrols prices on the diesel front.
65% of cars are Diesel around here.................but I still have a WRX, and this would be for the missus, so......
The 3.0R costs something like 62,000 Euros or more, the 2.0 I dont even know how much it is because it is so wimpy (we dont get STis Legacys here).
98 petrol goes for 1,67 Euros, diesel for 1,55 Euros or something of the sort.
We have still have not overtaken the petrols prices on the diesel front.
65% of cars are Diesel around here.................but I still have a WRX, and this would be for the missus, so......
Last edited by Janspeed; 22 June 2008 at 04:33 AM.
22 June 2008, 02:05 PM
#15
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: .........
Posts: 5,968
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
True, there will be, this was confirmed by a Subaru engineer last time I was at the garage.
In fact there was a 3.0 litre Diesel being developed but it seems to have beed shelved, or they are just waiting to rectify a couple of things. Seems it needs an auto to handle the Torque.....
23 June 2008, 02:15 PM
#20
On Deck: Redesigned 2010 Subaru Legacy
SUBARU : 車種紹介 > レガシィ
SUBARU : インフォメーション > スãƒãƒ«ãƒˆãƒ”ックス2008 > 購入資金50万円プレゼント
SUBARU : 車種紹介 > レガシィ
SUBARU : インフォメーション > スãƒãƒ«ãƒˆãƒ”ックス2008 > 購入資金50万円プレゼント
Last edited by The Trooper 1815; 23 June 2008 at 02:21 PM.
24 June 2008, 01:57 PM
#21
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: .........
Posts: 5,968
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"With the 3.0-liter model discarded, we have it on good authority that Subaru is seriously considering adding a hot Legacy STI to the mix further down the road — a sedan destined to get a turbocharged version of the company's current 3.7-liter engine that will reportedly pump out upwards of 430 hp."
What they need is a 3.0 Diesel with many "torques" and few 0-60's!
What they need is a 3.0 Diesel with many "torques" and few 0-60's!
24 June 2008, 04:31 PM
#23
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,070
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Financially doesn't make a lot of sense when you can get brand new 2 litre petrol sport tourers for £15k - so save £5k. Yes you'll be paying out more on petrol, probably about 6 pence per mile incl extra road tax but you'll need to do about 80,000 miles in the diesel before you start to make savings over the petrol model. You'll lose more of your money on depreciation with the diesel over a 3 year period than the petrol version so it doesn't make a lot of sense!!!!
1. Even though the diesel costs more to buy there is no way it is going to have worse residuals than the 2.0 litre petrol. In addition, it will be miles easier to sell the diesel than the petrol. I would even go so far as to say that even though the diesel starts from a higher list price you'll lose less money in pure cash terms in depreciation than with the petrol.
2. The 2.0 litre petrol doesn't have enough grunt for that kind of car. My dad has the 3.0 and while it is a great car it certainly isn't light. 0-60 for the auto-only petrol is 11.8secs vs 8.9 for the diesel.
3. Tax is a big factor. 200g CO2 vs 150g. This will affect your road tax and any income tax you pay.
4. The diesel is arguably the best 2.0 litre diesel in the world. Can't remember the petrol winning any awards or even getting any praise full stop.
5. If you can get a petrol 2.0 for 15k then there is a reason for that - no one wants them.
HTH
24 June 2008, 04:54 PM
#24
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: .........
Posts: 5,968
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry, have to disagree with virtually all of that.
1. Even though the diesel costs more to buy there is no way it is going to have worse residuals than the 2.0 litre petrol. In addition, it will be miles easier to sell the diesel than the petrol. I would even go so far as to say that even though the diesel starts from a higher list price you'll lose less money in pure cash terms in depreciation than with the petrol.
2. The 2.0 litre petrol doesn't have enough grunt for that kind of car. My dad has the 3.0 and while it is a great car it certainly isn't light. 0-60 for the auto-only petrol is 11.8secs vs 8.9 for the diesel.
3. Tax is a big factor. 200g CO2 vs 150g. This will affect your road tax and any income tax you pay.
4. The diesel is arguably the best 2.0 litre diesel in the world. Can't remember the petrol winning any awards or even getting any praise full stop.
5. If you can get a petrol 2.0 for 15k then there is a reason for that - no one wants them.
HTH
1. Even though the diesel costs more to buy there is no way it is going to have worse residuals than the 2.0 litre petrol. In addition, it will be miles easier to sell the diesel than the petrol. I would even go so far as to say that even though the diesel starts from a higher list price you'll lose less money in pure cash terms in depreciation than with the petrol.
2. The 2.0 litre petrol doesn't have enough grunt for that kind of car. My dad has the 3.0 and while it is a great car it certainly isn't light. 0-60 for the auto-only petrol is 11.8secs vs 8.9 for the diesel.
3. Tax is a big factor. 200g CO2 vs 150g. This will affect your road tax and any income tax you pay.
4. The diesel is arguably the best 2.0 litre diesel in the world. Can't remember the petrol winning any awards or even getting any praise full stop.
5. If you can get a petrol 2.0 for 15k then there is a reason for that - no one wants them.
HTH
Good point!
Wonder if the WRX will benefit from the diesel, having less depreciation.
24 June 2008, 09:42 PM
#27
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 387
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry, have to disagree with virtually all of that.
1. Even though the diesel costs more to buy there is no way it is going to have worse residuals than the 2.0 litre petrol. In addition, it will be miles easier to sell the diesel than the petrol. I would even go so far as to say that even though the diesel starts from a higher list price you'll lose less money in pure cash terms in depreciation than with the petrol.
2. The 2.0 litre petrol doesn't have enough grunt for that kind of car. My dad has the 3.0 and while it is a great car it certainly isn't light. 0-60 for the auto-only petrol is 11.8secs vs 8.9 for the diesel.
3. Tax is a big factor. 200g CO2 vs 150g. This will affect your road tax and any income tax you pay.
4. The diesel is arguably the best 2.0 litre diesel in the world. Can't remember the petrol winning any awards or even getting any praise full stop.
5. If you can get a petrol 2.0 for 15k then there is a reason for that - no one wants them.
HTH
1. Even though the diesel costs more to buy there is no way it is going to have worse residuals than the 2.0 litre petrol. In addition, it will be miles easier to sell the diesel than the petrol. I would even go so far as to say that even though the diesel starts from a higher list price you'll lose less money in pure cash terms in depreciation than with the petrol.
2. The 2.0 litre petrol doesn't have enough grunt for that kind of car. My dad has the 3.0 and while it is a great car it certainly isn't light. 0-60 for the auto-only petrol is 11.8secs vs 8.9 for the diesel.
3. Tax is a big factor. 200g CO2 vs 150g. This will affect your road tax and any income tax you pay.
4. The diesel is arguably the best 2.0 litre diesel in the world. Can't remember the petrol winning any awards or even getting any praise full stop.
5. If you can get a petrol 2.0 for 15k then there is a reason for that - no one wants them.
HTH
Fact is you can still buy a pre reg petrol Legacy estate 2 litre 162 bhp manual model (0-60 in 9.5 secs) for £14700 which is £5300 less than the new diesel (assuming you can get £1000 discount on the diesel).
So save yourself £5300!!!
Depreciation - only look at Parkers site and see that the value after 3 yrs is exactly the same for both petrol and diesel which I find surprising.
So buy a petrol and the value drops from £14700 to £8200 after 3 years - you lose £6500.
Buy a diesel and you're losing all the way dropping from £20000 down to £8200 - you lose £11800 - ouch
If it's a company car then you'll have to lose some of this saving but how many Legacy's are company cars???
Interesting how the previous successes of the Legacy seem to be quickly forgotten when a version with diesel engine comes on the scene - fact was that Legacy was a former "Car of Japan" and has consistently had good write ups and awards for reliability and customer satisfaction with the likes of JD Power etc.
Go and buy a diesel if you want and leave the low demand petrol model for me!!
Sorry - it's got to be petrol !!
24 June 2008, 10:16 PM
#28
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,070
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When I read your first post I was about to jump in and criticise your 80,000 mile claim, but was surprised that the numbers do work out about that much. I can see where you're coming from with this even though it is a bit unfair comparing pre-reg with new. If you don't do many miles and change your car fairly regularly then there aren't many savings to be had from the diesel. I've been thinking about this for a while and if you don't do many miles then the most economical way to travel is in a small car with a petrol engine.
You do make some interesting points although I think we'd agree that Parker's Guide has got it wrong with the residuals.
So, shock horror, the diesel might not win this one. Although I'd need some serious convincing that the petrol has enough grunt to make it a good drive.
You do make some interesting points although I think we'd agree that Parker's Guide has got it wrong with the residuals.
So, shock horror, the diesel might not win this one. Although I'd need some serious convincing that the petrol has enough grunt to make it a good drive.
24 June 2008, 10:40 PM
#29
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Surely you need to compare like for like?
The petrol one for £14700 is a 2007 car no?
Cheapest 08 petrol I can find is £16k so the real difference would seem to be £4K (although the diesel appears to be better specced & the petrol's are 2007 models which didn't sell so pre-registered. All the 08 reg diesels are 2008 cars ex demo & hardly discounted).
Petrol 33.2MPG / Diesel 49.6MPG so that's around a £40 difference per 1000 miles, given a 13p a litre margin in pump prices as now.
2009 Tax for the petrol 2.0 is £110 higher than the diesel.
Would need to check on servicing cost to get an overall picture (Diesel is £12k interval).
I would expect stronger residuals on a diesel than a petrol.
As Mr Blaster said, if you keep it a while & do a reasonable mileage the D makes more sense.
The petrol one for £14700 is a 2007 car no?
Cheapest 08 petrol I can find is £16k so the real difference would seem to be £4K (although the diesel appears to be better specced & the petrol's are 2007 models which didn't sell so pre-registered. All the 08 reg diesels are 2008 cars ex demo & hardly discounted).
Petrol 33.2MPG / Diesel 49.6MPG so that's around a £40 difference per 1000 miles, given a 13p a litre margin in pump prices as now.
2009 Tax for the petrol 2.0 is £110 higher than the diesel.
Would need to check on servicing cost to get an overall picture (Diesel is £12k interval).
I would expect stronger residuals on a diesel than a petrol.
As Mr Blaster said, if you keep it a while & do a reasonable mileage the D makes more sense.
24 June 2008, 10:59 PM
#30
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: .........
Posts: 5,968
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Surely you need to compare like for like?
The petrol one for £14700 is a 2007 car no?
Cheapest 08 petrol I can find is £16k so the real difference would seem to be £4K (although the diesel appears to be better specced & the petrol's are 2007 models which didn't sell so pre-registered. All the 08 reg diesels are 2008 cars ex demo & hardly discounted).
Petrol 33.2MPG / Diesel 49.6MPG so that's around a £40 difference per 1000 miles, given a 13p a litre margin in pump prices as now.
2009 Tax for the petrol 2.0 is £110 higher than the diesel.
Would need to check on servicing cost to get an overall picture (Diesel is £12k interval).
I would expect stronger residuals on a diesel than a petrol.
As Mr Blaster said, if you keep it a while & do a reasonable mileage the D makes more sense.
The petrol one for £14700 is a 2007 car no?
Cheapest 08 petrol I can find is £16k so the real difference would seem to be £4K (although the diesel appears to be better specced & the petrol's are 2007 models which didn't sell so pre-registered. All the 08 reg diesels are 2008 cars ex demo & hardly discounted).
Petrol 33.2MPG / Diesel 49.6MPG so that's around a £40 difference per 1000 miles, given a 13p a litre margin in pump prices as now.
2009 Tax for the petrol 2.0 is £110 higher than the diesel.
Would need to check on servicing cost to get an overall picture (Diesel is £12k interval).
I would expect stronger residuals on a diesel than a petrol.
As Mr Blaster said, if you keep it a while & do a reasonable mileage the D makes more sense.
EVO has become more and more pro-Diesel so it should be interesting to see what tests they will be performing over the next few months.
Again like I said a remap will interesting in this new 2.0D.