Forums » Grassroots Motorsports » Legacy GT vs Legacy 3.0 1 2

• 

  Sept. 19, 2010 1:26 p.m. Woody SuperDork

  I am thinking about replacing my 2004 WRX with a 2005+ Legacy, as I need a little more room in the back seat. I know that the Legacy GT is generally well loved, but I know nothing of the Legacy 3.0.

  Anybody have any experience with them?

• 

  Sept. 19, 2010 2:44 p.m. pinchvalve SuperDork

  IMHO the 3.0 was mostly a marketing effort so that Subaru could say that they had a 6-cylinder like everyone else. I don't recall it having any more power or other advantages compared to the Turbo-4. Not saying that it was good or bad, just different.

  "Don't Sweat the Petty Things." Yes, and Don't Pet the Sweaty Things.

• 

  Sept. 19, 2010 3:33 p.m. dj06482 Reader

  I'd prefer the turbo 2.5L 4cyl. Subaru has a ton of experience with it (STI, WRX, Forrester, and LGT), and there's a healthy aftermarket. The 3.0 is more rare and offers less power potential. IIRC, the 3.0 also cost a ton more when new than the 2.5 turbo.

  '94 K1500 | '97 328is | '05 Odyssey | '06 RAV4

• 

  Sept. 19, 2010 3:43 p.m. Knurled HalfDork

  I like the 3-liter's immediacy, and the fact that it doesn't make boy-racer noises. (It makes flat-six noises. Much nicer)

  I speak as someone who hasn't driven one in anger, though, just around town. The main problem with either engine is that it has a Legacy around it, which manages to be both huge and cramped.

• 

  Sept. 19, 2010 4:49 p.m. JtspellS Reader

  No timing belt is the only difference that i know of (at least the SVX 6 did not have one)

• 

  Sept. 19, 2010 7:18 p.m. DaveEstey Reader

  In reply to Knurled:

  My GT put down 230lb ft of torque at 2700rpm at the wheels when I last had it on the dyno.

• 

  Sept. 19, 2010 7:50 p.m. irish44j HalfDork

  get an 08+ wrx.....same amount of backseat room as pre-2010 Legacys....quite a bit more than your wrx.

  08s you can find pretty cheap since they're black sheep. Of course if you want the moar powah....go 09+

  Plus they don't have the boy-racer look.

• 

  Sept. 19, 2010 8:19 p.m. Knurled HalfDork

  DaveEstey wrote: In reply to Knurled: My GT put down 230lb ft of torque at 2700rpm at the wheels when I last had it on the dyno.

  That's great, but how responsive is it at part throttle when you're just driving around? That's the kind of immediacy I'm talking about.

• 

  Sept. 19, 2010 9:12 p.m. Woody SuperDork

  Was the 3.0 available with a stick?

  Unleash the relentless power of her 1400cc Quadrozontal engine...

• 

  Sept. 19, 2010 10:00 p.m. DaveEstey Reader

  In reply to Knurled:

  Stock response isn't incredible. A Cobb stage 1 retune makes a world of difference though. Seems Subaru could have spent a little more time on the fuel maps.

  Mine is an 05 so it has the EJ257, same engine as the STi. 07 they switched to the EJ255 so I can't comment on them.

• 

  Sept. 20, 2010 12:13 p.m. rogerbvonceg Reader

  Woody wrote: Was the 3.0 available with a stick?

  I don't think so...last I checked. The GT was definitely marketed as the sportier offering. Now, a turbo'd 3.0 mated to the 6-speed manual...

• 

  Sept. 20, 2010 12:13 p.m. NGTD HalfDork

  Auto only.

• 

  Sept. 20, 2010 2:14 p.m. ReverendDexter Dork

  3.0 only came in front of an automatic. My mother has one in her Outback, and it's surprisingly quick. I've never driven a 2.5 turbo car, so I can't speak to the comparison, but the numbers would indicate that the 3.0 is considerably more torquey, though I'd imagine the 2.5T would be more miserly with fuel (the 3.0 does require premium).

  --There is no turd more polished than the Ford Mustang--

• 

  Sept. 20, 2010 6:02 p.m. irish44j HalfDork

  In reply to ReverendDexter:

  IIRC, the 2.5T's all require premium as well. At least my WRX does and my buddy's 05 LGT wagon does. And "miserly" is not a word I would use about mine.....about the same mileage I got with the 3.0 V6 in my old Maxima, if not worse.

• 

  Sept. 20, 2010 6:37 p.m. Woody SuperDork

  My 2.0 Turbo WRX requires premium (no big deal) and gets 23.5 MPG on every tankful.

  Unleash the relentless power of her 1400cc Quadrozontal engine...

• 

  Sept. 20, 2010 6:45 p.m. Hocrest Reader

  JtspellS wrote: No timing belt is the only difference that i know of (at least the SVX 6 did not have one)

  The 3.3 6 cyl in the SVX has a timing belt. The newer 3.0 and larger 6's have a timing chain.

• 

  Sept. 20, 2010 6:55 p.m. ignorant SuperDork

  Woody wrote: My 2.0 Turbo WRX requires premium (no big deal) and gets 23.5 MPG on *every* tankful.

  uggh.. Well strike them off my list. I got a 45 mile each way commute and it sure is hard to move from a crap ass civic with 40+mpg to that.

  When you have to shoot, shoot, don't talk.

• 

  Sept. 20, 2010 7:32 p.m. Woody SuperDork

  ignorant wrote: uggh.. Well strike them off my list. I got a 45 mile each way commute and it sure is hard to move from a crap ass civic with 40+mpg to that.

  That's what I did. I saved enough fuel with 12 years of Civic Si ownership that I figured I'd earned myself a guzzler.

  Unleash the relentless power of her 1400cc Quadrozontal engine...

• 

  Sept. 20, 2010 9:39 p.m. DaveEstey Reader

  I average 26-27mpg in my GT.

• 

  Sept. 20, 2010 10:39 p.m. clutchsmoke New Reader

  dj06482 wrote: I'd prefer the turbo 2.5L 4cyl. Subaru has a ton of experience with it (STI, WRX, Forrester, and LGT), and there's a healthy aftermarket. The 3.0 is more rare and offers less power potential. IIRC, the 3.0 also cost a ton more when new than the 2.5 turbo.

  The 2.5 is tried and true. H6 is only offered with an auto.

• 

  Sept. 21, 2010 8:59 a.m. ReverendDexter Dork

  irish44j wrote: IIRC, the 2.5T's all require premium as well.

  My apologies, I wasn't trying to imply elsewise - just state that the 3.0 also requires premium. You know, for those people that can't do math and think premium gas is the undoing of all their finances

  --There is no turd more polished than the Ford Mustang--

• 

  Sept. 21, 2010 9:34 a.m. Teh E36 M3 Reader

  Trying to find a GT manual is quite difficult. Just spent an hour looking at autotrader and cars.com for a legacy gt wagon manual: Rocking Horse Poo.

• 

  Sept. 21, 2010 9:37 a.m. Woody SuperDork

  They stopped making 5 speed wagons after 2005.

  Unleash the relentless power of her 1400cc Quadrozontal engine...

• 

  Sept. 21, 2010 12:09 p.m. rogerbvonceg Reader

  2008

  2.5 GT: 243 hp@6000 RPM, 241 Ft/lbs@3600 RPM, EPA MPG 20/27 3.0R: 245 hp@6600RPM, 215 Ft/lbs@4200 RPM, EPA MPG 17/24

  GT FTW.

• 

  Sept. 22, 2010 3:55 p.m. PeterAK Dork

  Teh E36 M3 wrote: Trying to find a GT manual is quite difficult. Just spent an hour looking at autotrader and cars.com for a legacy gt wagon manual: Rocking Horse Poo.

  Truth. 2005 was the first year of the 2.5 turbo in the GT and the last year of the wagon with a 5 speed. Be patient if that's the car you want. But it's worth it!

1 2  

You'll need to log in to post.