NY Times Attacks SVX!!!

[JonathanS]

What have we done to deserve this (in a review of the Subaru B9 Tribeca)? :

"I have affection for this contrarian carmaker and its unsurpassed line of relatively affordable all-wheel-drive sedans and wagons, but I am at a loss to explain Subaru's continuing desire to change its image into something else, along the lines of "BMW's from Mars." See, this is not the first time Subaru has tried to move upmarket by introducing a flagship U.F.O. with an astronomical price. [ Those with good memories will recall the SVX "sports car" of 1992-97, though most enthusiasts have happily forgotten.

Subaru must have amnesia, too, or it would not have chosen to enter a crowded segment with a vehicle that is neither noteworthy nor novel, a sin all too similar to the one it committed with the SVX. Someone must have thought that being noticeable was enough, as if the B9 Tribeca could get by on its looks alone. That misguided notion makes the S.U.V.'s goofy name seem almost brilliant by comparison. (For those unwilling to do their own Googling, the B is for boxer, as in the engine design; the 9 is the internal model designation; and Tribeca is for a trendy Manhattan neighborhood that has absolutely nothing to do with the vehicle.)

[mysvxrocks]

Happily forgotten, and a sin??? wtf, im only 16 and have yet to find a car that I would want more.. who ever wrote that article obviously knows jack about this great car, I hope no one who reads that takes it seriously, because I would turn down a bmw over the SVX if I had the choice. Who ever wrote it needs some phone calls from some members of this network to teach him a lesson I can already see it, the next article, "Mad members of an SVX network retaliate to my previous article on Subarus "absolutely amazing" sports car" ~Dennis

[Pure_Insanity8]

Granted I'm not a big fan of the Tribeca... but why rag on the SVX?

Most enthusiast have happily forgotten?!? What is that about? We have seen plenty an article from "enthusiasts" that do almost nothing but PRAISE the SVX. Sure it was a shot at better by different, but it had plenty of function with its form.

The author has obviously never seen or driven a SVX (at least it seems). I think he should make an inspection under the hood of one of our SVX's (with shot hood struts)... and we'll watch the fun.

[LarryIII]

What is the name of the author of the article. I think that I'll drop him a note.

[Rd96SVX]

HMM, The guy must have a beef with the SVX. Plus he isn't a very good writer if that was in fact a review of the Tribeca. There was no 'meat' to the article about the B9.. he just ranted about the colossal failure of the SVX.. lol, just let it roll off fellas. He has no clue.

[dcarrb]

The writer (who probably never drove an SVX) certainly went overboard dissing the car, but his parallels between Subaru's marketing of it and the Tribeca are dead-on. Suby lost its sense of marketing direction when the "Inexpensive and built to stay that way" campaign faded into history, and approching 20 years later, they still can't figure out what they're doing. That the company sells cars in spite of itself is a testimony to the quality of the product and consequential word-of-mouth advertising.

dcb

[YellowBird]

Hey, just think if he had praised the SVX - do you know how hard it would be from now on to buy one or get parts. What some don't know (the truth) only helps us.

[svx_commuter]

I do not agree with the authors opinion but would I ever like to send that person an e-mail and see if I get an answer! Coward comeforth and show thyself.... on this web site.

The Tribeca is an awful Subaru in my opinion. The third row of seats is useless. I think it is the GM influence trying to ruin the company. The Tribeca would have sold better if it was bigger inside. Now the 2006 OB is smaller than the 2005 trying to force Subaru lovers into the larger vechicle. IMHO

[DreamingOfSpeed]

Heres a link to the complete article http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/11/au...es/11AUTO.html

[mysvxrocks]

We should all send him an e-mail and see what happens, who knows maybe he'll write an article on us

[Ricochet]

Would you buy an SVX for $34,000 back in the day? I spent $3,500 on mine now and with all the troubles it's having, I kind of agree with this article. Plus they only run 15's in the quarter mile, have below average handling, and not so great gas mileage. Don't get me wrong I really do love the looks and feel while sitting in the car, but there are plenty better ones out there.

[SubaSteevo]

Originally Posted by Ricochet

Would you buy an SVX for $34,000 back in the day? I spent $3,500 on mine now and with all the troubles it's having, I kind of agree with this article. Plus they only run 15's in the quarter mile, have below average handling, and not so great gas mileage. Don't get me wrong I really do love the looks and feel while sitting in the car, but there are plenty better ones out there.

I disagree with the below average handling. My SVX handles better than any other car I've driven. And for the price (now), I doubt there's anything better all-around.

[Tim]

Originally Posted by Ricochet

Would you buy an SVX for $34,000 back in the day? I spent $3,500 on mine now and with all the troubles it's having, I kind of agree with this article. Plus they only run 15's in the quarter mile, have below average handling, and not so great gas mileage. Don't get me wrong I really do love the looks and feel while sitting in the car, but there are plenty better ones out there.

You're comparing apples to oranges...

Your car now is 13 years old. Things are starting to wear out. I used to think my car had horrible handling but my struts were completely shot when I took them out.

If you purchased it brand new it probably would have way better handling than it has now.

The 1/4 mile I could agree with, but it was right on par with everything in 92.

Looking at your locker, the overall condition is amazing on your svx. Keep it up

[mohrds]

Originally Posted by Ricochet

Would you buy an SVX for $34,000 back in the day? I spent $3,500 on mine now and with all the troubles it's having, I kind of agree with this article. Plus they only run 15's in the quarter mile, have below average handling, and not so great gas mileage. Don't get me wrong I really do love the looks and feel while sitting in the car, but there are plenty better ones out there.

The MSRP was only 26.5K in 92. That isn't that bad in comparison. A 3000GT base model was the same price, the SL model was a couple grand more and the turbo VR4 was 10K more. Subaru raised prices every year, possibly to edge into a higher class category, possibly to recover the money they were losing on the car.

It was about 10K more than the Z28, 11K more than the Mustang GT, and 3K less than the 300ZX.

If you never drove one when it was brand new, it is difficult to comprehend. The SVX was a tight, solid, smooth car, with design that stood out against anything non-exotic at that time.

Plus the fuel mileage and handling were substantially better than they are 10+ years later. They were right in class with the other cars I described.

BTW: I didn't pay 34K for it, but I did pay 22K for one and I thought it was a great deal.

Doug

[Ricochet]

I should clarify, below average handling in its class when new. I don't mean to put our cars down or anything, I love svx's but some of the truth hurts.