Talk:Subaru Legacy (third generation)

Removing of categories

Why should this page not be in any categories? Christian Giersing (talk) 19:02, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Because the main article Subaru Legacy is already listed, and listing the individual generations is unnecessary. (Regushee (talk) 19:27, 23 March 2009 (UTC))

But to example both Volkswagen Golf and Volkswagen Golf Mk5 is categorized. Christian Giersing (talk) 08:44, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

And it shouldn't be either. The subject of categorization is the vehicle itself, not the multiple generational changes of the vehicle. (Regushee (talk) 14:38, 24 March 2009 (UTC))

I added categories because every article has to be in some category?, anyway bots and automated scripts will add uncategorised tag those without any --Typ932 ^T·C 15:57, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

All-wheel Drive

The introductory paragraph claims that all models were fitted with "Symmetrical All-wheel drive", however it is my understanding that only the manual-transmission equipped third-generation Legacy was symmetrical. Most cars were equipped with an automatic, which had a heavily front-biased all-wheel drive system. ~linns — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.71.118.24 (talk) 15:08, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Symmetrical All wheel drive refers to the fact that the engine and transmission sit in a north-south orientation, not the implementation of the torque supplied to the front and rear wheels. The automatic transmission system varies with its ability to supply torque to the front and rear wheels based on conditions, however there are two systems where the torque is biased towards the front, and a second system called VTD that splits the torque more towards the back in normal conditions, then varies the torque when wheel spin is detected. (Regushee (talk) 20:36, 29 March 2012 (UTC))

Are you certain that "symmetrical" refers to a longitudinal (as opposed to transverse) engine layout? I'm quite sure that BMW, Mercedes and others have RWD-biased AWD systems which they make careful note *not* to refer to as "symmetrical", even though BMW and Mercedes mount their engines longitudinally (except for Mecedes' eco-boxes, of course). When talking to a Subaru dealer technician recently, he mentioned that "Symmetrical AWD" refers specifically to a 50:50 default torque split (regardless of if it can bias the split using a computer-controlled clutch), and as a result, new Subarus say "Symmetrical AWD" on them, whilst the third gen Legacy said simply "AWD". The system used on this third generation is a default 90:10 front:rear split, with only one effective secondary mode of operation, which is when the center clutch is locked, resulting in a 50:50 split. This is in reference to the Subaru Factory Service Manual for the 2001 Legacy GT. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Linns (talk • contribs) 02:47, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Completeness

Not sure of this article's completeness. It seems to only concentrate on the B4, which is the main performance variant, and a few other performance special editions, without giving any information on the standard models in the range. However, the pictures all appear to be of non-B4 vehicles. 86.16.190.232 (talk) 14:30, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Trimming B4

Since this article seems to be focused on the B4 trim level, I suggest that the B4 section be trimmed or removed, or have a different article made. Ryou Hashimoto (talk) 08:30, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Baja merger

The Baja merger was abrupt and without discussion. Please undo and open this merger to discussion.842U (talk) 22:22, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

I think the Baja article is fine just the way it is. Committee discussion is unnecessary as there is no detriment to the quality of the information, and appropriate citations are given.(Regushee (talk) 00:10, 14 May 2012 (UTC))

Agreed. The Baja is not any different to the Outback wagon, just a different body style akin to the Outback sedan. After pruning the unencyclopedic content (like paint codes and the long rant about the history of Subaru-Isuzu in the US), there was not much content left over so I did the merger based on the precedent set by the Outback merger, a much larger and more controversial change. A single page makes it so much easier to compare the differences of the Legacy, Outback and Baja now. Having the Baja information included here also increases the visibility of this little-known obscure car (especially outside North America). OSX (talk • contributions) 10:13, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

I am a bit torn on the Baja, not that it is a favorite of mine. Having a unique bodystyle as well as its own name makes me reluctant to agree to the merger - one feels that the line has to be drawn somewhere, and I believe that here is my place. But this is not a strong condemnation, just a mild disapproval and I believe that the articles in question will be perfectly fine in either case.  ⊂| Mr.choppers |⊃  (talk) 08:49, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

The front and interior are the same as the Outback, as are the rear doors. Too me they clearly are of the same heritage and therefore are no different to being separate body variants. If the the front-end was re-styled then I would not have undertaken made the merger. To me it is no different to the Holden Commodore and Holden Ute (another meger candidate). In spite of this, I don't consider it a major concern having this model exist as an idenpendant article. OSX (talk • contributions) 12:38, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

The Baja (BT) is an augmentation of the Outback Wagon platform (BH). Other than the obvious truck changes and some stylistic differences, it is the same platform. All three vehicles (Legacy, Outback, Baja) are even covered in the same platform service manual. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.212.212.244 (talk) 23:40, 14 January 2017 (UTC)