Reasonably priced, AWD daily driver?

subaru, i have a 2001 outback with cooper touring tires .safe smooth realiable.we have calibers and vibes at work crappy
 
Another vote for Subaru being a 2001 2.5RS owner. It's still a drivers car like a BMW it's just prone to being "less refined" if you will. More rattles, squeeks and cheaper interior but everything feels right. Very reliable cars and the AWD makes it helpful in the dry, rain and snow.



Like another poster said look for the 2004 on up models for the better tranny(in the WRX that is). STi will be the closest thing to an M3 and those can be had for mid twenties, just make sure to stay away from early '04 models. I think thats about it.



Good luck
 
You'll have a very hard time finding a WRX for under $15k. I've been through several Subarus and my old man has taken a few to 300k miles and even one to 500k. Over the last 15 years the rest of my paternal family has jumped on the Subaru bandwagon.



As for models, I would suggest looking at Legacy Outbacks in the '01-03 range. You'll get an 8" clearance, AWD, around 65 cubic feet of cargo volume, some of the best leg room (front and rear), fuel effeciency in the high 20s (many report still getting 30MPG on these models), and some even have dual sun roofs. By looking at an '03 model you can probably find a nice L.L. Bean model decked out for around $12k. And most likely the kind of people who buy these cars new are the kind of people willing to take care of them, so you should find one in like-new condition. This model also has the best styling; the new pinched nose look is gross, if you ask me.
 
ryotto said:
IN the winter, I would rather drive a FWD car with winter tires on, then a AWD car with all-seasons on.
Click to expand...



Similar opinion here- I'd rather drive a RWD car with snows (and a limited-slip diff) than anything with all-seasons.



For that matter, back when I had both a Carerra4 (Dunlop snows) and a Benz SEC (Michelin snows IIRC) the Benz was better in the snow than the AWD Porsche :nixweiss

My RWD Volvo was better than my WRX too, (both with Blizzaks) and that one *really* surprised me! It was a *lot* slower, but the Volvo simply stayed neutral and never broke loose, just one of those overall combos (vehicle/modifications/tires) that worked great in bad weather.
 
Accumulator said:
Similar opinion here- I'd rather drive a RWD car with snows (and a limited-slip diff) than anything with all-seasons.



For that matter, back when I had both a Carerra4 (Dunlop snows) and a Benz SEC (Michelin snows IIRC) the Benz was better in the snow than the AWD Porsche :nixweiss

My RWD Volvo was better than my WRX too, (both with Blizzaks) and that one *really* surprised me! It was a *lot* slower, but the Volvo simply stayed neutral and never broke loose, just one of those overall combos (vehicle/modifications/tires) that worked great in bad weather.
Click to expand...



Factory swaybars on the wrx? If you had some massive sways I would expect it to not handle so well in the snow, but on the stock sways I am surprised the wrx broke loose.
 
hadboosttroy said:
Factory swaybars on the wrx? If you had some massive sways I would expect it to not handle so well in the snow, but on the stock sways I am surprised the wrx broke loose.
Click to expand...



Yep, the WRX was all factory OE. The WRX tended towards initial understeer unless I resorted to "flicking" it or goofy stuff like that whereas the Volvo was perfectly neutral, responding to my inputs just right(note that the Volvo *did* have a significantly modified suspension).



Too bad the WRX didn't have the adjustability of the STis, I probably could've dialed it in to what I wanted.



FWIW the Blizzaks I had on it were the same four tires I'd previously run on an Audi S6 wagon (happy coincidence about the two cars taking the same size :D Glad I kept the tires when I sold the S6, shame I didn't keep the car too :o ). The Audi was *great* in the snow, whole 'nother world compared to the WRX :nixweiss
 
I had different experiences that you guys it seems. I had two Civics. 1990 and 2001 both in the winter both with Hankook 404 Winter tires. The tires made a huge difference and the cars handled great in the snow but my Impreza I had with Avon M550 A/S was way better yet.
 
Same here my Subaru Legacy wagon is unbelievable in the snow with A/S. But then again its a 2005. Also the 2005+ Outbacks come with a limited slip rear which would probably be even better in high snow drifts.
 
The stock WRX suspension I would classify as pig like for amount of understeer it has. In fact it's pretty much a travesty that a capable car is so gimped from the factory. I run Hankook 404s for my winter tire. They are not Blizzaks mine you, but a good tire for the price imo.
 
I have a Mazda tribute (ford escape twin) and I got it for under $20k. All wheel drive and 4yr 50,000 mile bumper to bumper warranty. You could pick a used one up for $15k with a lot of warranty left.
 
Accumulator said:
Just goes to show that YMMV :D And personal preference/driving style probably factors in too.
Click to expand...

Yeah, AWD for sure takes some getting use to and requires a totally different driving style. Especially in the snow. I remember fishtailing around a corner in the snow and driving like my old car. Then realized it was best to just keep giving it gas because one of the tires will grab and you are all set. LOL Then I went from an AWD Suabru to a Ford F-150. Now that was a change!
 
Danase said:
Yeah, AWD for sure takes some getting use to and requires a totally different driving style. .
Click to expand...



Yeah, when I got my first AWD car (in '87) it was very different from anything I'd driven before.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top