WTF kinda question is that??? Kia Hyundai Suzuki (cars)...get rid of that crap all day long..but the scoobies..hell no!...half those losers calling them "4x4" cars shouldn't even have the right to own one..lol
Haha, what an interesting question. I would infact miss Subaru (albeit that might be because of this community ). Subaru, much like Honda and Toyota IMO creates an unprecedented amount of value for their product. Fundamentally, value is the trade off between benefits and cost. Generally, this is represented by a $ / marginal utility gained (ie bang for the buck). The Subaru brand, although small in size, is positioned amazingly high within its market niche. I cannot say the same for GM, Ford, etc. Honda and Toyota are popular because they make an efficient, economical car. Throughout the last 50 years we've seen those two brands enter our market because of this fact. If we look at what's called the "loose brick" theory, we can see that these two Japanese manufacturers (partially subsidized by the Japanese government at the time) were being asked to push into the US market anyway possible. The "hole" in the US market "wall (barriers of entry)" existed in a time period where oil prices were extremely high (arguably, higher than they are now...If a barrel of oil was about $3 in the 70s -- the present value of that barrel of oil now would be roughly $300). Our market wanted something cheap and good on gas. Enter Honda and Toyota into the market where they were more than happy to build a no-thrills car that got 20-30+ mpg. Our market responded as expected and now these companies finally had some market share which allowed them to develop relationships with US suppliers (lowering cost, etc) ultimately to the point where we are today with Japanese manufacturing stateside (more components for the Accord, etc are made within the US than the new mustang...in fact, its something like 97% versus 69%). As consumers, we've become a bit more educated over the last 50 years in the sense that we are lightyears beyond where we used to be in terms of what we want in our cars (we know the options). Educated consumers (hint Subaru owners) know that they are looking for a car which represents safety, reliability, performance and reasonably good gas mileage (measures of value to some degree). Subaru is one of the only companies right now (that at least comes to mind) that is able to manufacture a portion of their automobiles stateside (help fight import quotas, etc) that accomplishes this. What they produce is a well rounded package which IMO satisfies more a specific group of US consumers than most car manufacturers. One of the greatest things to happen to Subaru is Toyota's involvement. Within the next 5 years I expect to see tremendous manufacturing improvements (which could translate to lower costs). Many many many people are affected by Subaru's designs. Yes, they're not "standard" by any means of the word, but that fact alone is another element of Subaru's appeal. The same can be said for (almost any design by) Saturn***, Honda,Toyota, etc. These cars create a culture of their own, and have gained respect for that. The true question, in my opinion, should be would anyone care if GM, Ford, etc were gone tomorrow? A common argument would be the loss of jobs. If you really think about it, the rate at which non-US automobile manufacturers are moving stateside presents a unique debate -- are we losing jobs or simply changing bosses? Granted a majority of these manufactures are creating greenfield plants (in areas where cars have never been produced), I believe the question is still valid. Inefficiency is killing us (our car companies), there are many reasons but the one which is brought up continuously are the unions. GM for example has established production methods that require 1/3 the workers currently, however, due to union agreements they cannot decrease their workforce size for another 3 years. That means another 3 years of excess workforce sitting around with nothing to do. That's wasted capital. Problems like this trickle down into the cost of our vehicles ultimately disrupting the "$ / marginal utility" for us and as a result we go elsewhere. This is a long winded reply, and I apologize. I could probably talk for hours about a topic like this I'm curious if anyone has anything to add on to or object to what Ive said above. *** In case you didnt know this, the Solsitce and Sky are not a design of US origin. They were purchased from Opel. In case you were wondering how a design like that just came out of nowhere.
Its a good question.....Would it be missed.... Would you really miss Subaru or would you miss you're STI, I'm not sure I would miss either one, Its not like there isn't a car to replace it. I would probally just buy an EVO an honestly the rest of you probally would as well. What does Subaru offer me that I can't get somewhere else?
As Alex has said, I think there is more of a chance that I would miss the community more than the brand itself. I guess the question is would the Evo community be better off if we all had one of those. Which is not to say we are better than the evo guys....which we are...I mean err....
I dunno...If I didnt get the suby, I probably would have gone in an entirely different direction (sadly mustang) But I agree with the community aspect, that is definitely one of the high points of driving a subaru in atlanta
lol me too. When I was buying my final choices finally came down to the 05 STi or the brand new 05 mustang. The STi was closer to track ready.
I think I can address part of that... The WRX... Mitsu doesn't offer a vehicle that can compare to the WRX in a budget-esque vehicle. Their other lancer models are in essence completely different vehicles; thus why it's dropping the name "Lancer" and just going to be called the Evolution... There is no other manufacturer out there that offers a vehicle like the WRX. Yes, once you get to STi level you can get the EVO to replace it - but what about someone who wants to spend under $25 or something of the sort. There aren't many options; your next closest would probably be a MazdaSpeed 3 or some crap like that... Just my $0.02... Anybody else know of a vehicle truly comparable to the WRX at that price point?
Subaru offers a car thats damn great for that demographic of 18 to late 20s IMO. Nevertheless, the car is widely enjoyed amongst 30+
This is a valid point. However, I feel that people (Americans especially) are very brand conscious. Why do people wear those silly Alligator shirts? Because they are better than other polos? No. Because everyone knows they cost $75 a polo. My first car was a '72 Chevrolet Monte Carlo. I dunno, I got real into the Chevy/Ford/Chrysler rivalries. To this day, I don't know if there is a Mustang I would buy. Yeah, there are some fast stangs, and I even think they are starting to look alright again. But brand loyalty is a bitch. Maybe I am alone in this, but I don't think I could buy an EVO. The 4G63 is an incredible motor. The EVO is an econobox with a nice motor. I think my image of Mitsubishi was tarnished with dealerships taking pictures of EVOs at track days and voiding the warranties. Did Subaru do this too? I don't really know. But I think I am just looking for justification to dislike Mitsu. I don't like them. I just like rivalries. Part of the reason I was drawn to the Subaru brand was the community. I knew Bobby and Nick well before I knew I was getting a WRX. But of course I liked Subaru's before I knew about WRXatlanta. Subarus are quirky... The brand where you get agressive styling, AWD, and those amazing little boxer engines. AND THAT is why I dislike the design direction the new Subies are taking. They are making them look like Camries! ssh: In attempting to appeal to a wider consumer base, they are getting rid of one of the biggest reasons I got a Subaru. The bland styling is growing on me, but I would not own one. Bugeyes4Life!:ddirty: