[Picus]

Just on the quality thing. I think it is important to make the distinction between a few things.

1) Mechanical reliability.
2) Exterior/interior part/fitment and finish quality.
3) design.

I think a lot of "car guys" talking about cars on forums sort of mish-mash these together, or talk about them interchangeably. For example, someone might say a domestic is "poor quality" and mean that they use low grade plastic on the interior. That doesn't mean the car is of poor quality, it means one material on the interior is. Example: people often comment the 3-series has a "cheap" interior, what they generally mean is the design is spartan, so it looks like plush than competitors. The actual material quality/fitment/finish is quite good. I've had people say Range Rovers are of fantastic quality - which is true in terms of interior materials, but mechanically they tend to suck. I hope this makes sense.

For the Cobalt; in terms of interior quality I am not a huge fan. Fitment is good, but the quality of materials is eh. Mechanically I am sure it is a fine car. The Subaru's interior is more appealing in a design sense to me, and the materials are of slightly better quality (imo), but I don't think it will be any more mechanically reliable than a cobalt.