My neighbour shouted me yesterday and told me that his brother had his first snow test for his legacy outback and said it was awesome. He even claims that it would defeat the FL2 in the snow!

Don't get me wrong, the subaru is great and my dad had one years back and it never got stuck in snow.

All things equal on the tyre front though (i.e just all weather tyres) surely the subaru must lose because of the lack of ground clearance for deeper snow and the technological superiority of the FL2 e.g terrain response and HDC.

Of course I told him to arrange a mental health assessment for his brother but how do you guys rate the subaru?

Or for that matter other 4WD cars like Audi Quattros? LL.B (Hons) - University of Derby
LOT (Lord of Time) - University of Gallifrey

I had a 2008 Subaru Legacy Diesel Estate up to 6 months ago and have very recent *ahem* "work-related" FL2 experience so am probably well placed to judge...

Subaru's are very good. Just slightly devoid of character (The new Boxer diesel is mildly amusing, just a tiny bit slow) and less-prone to garage visits than FL2 .

Outback is essentially a normal Leggy estate with more ground clearance, a high+low range box (something not fitted to FL2) and all weather tyres. New Forester is they ruined it!

My Dad has an old gen Forester (c.2000) it's essentially a short wheelbase Leggy on stilts and more usable off-road than the Outback. Forester is very good for something so road biased that isn't not blessed with LR-style ground clearance and is a fantastic compromise - fuel consumption isn't horrific either - about 30MPG for a 2.0 petrol. Last weekend he managed to extract a Nissan Navarra/L200-thingy out of a muddy field!

Anyway enough Subaru praise on an FL2 topic... Back to the original question though, as for FL2 vs Subaru Outback? No contest - even my Dad's looking for an FL2 to replace the Forester as his retirement car!

The Outback is a fantastic car. Bought my last one just over 4 years ago but my sister insisted upon nicking it from me after only 10 months..lol. It was at least as good as my current FL2, and previous Disco, in snow, ice, mud, whatever. Never had a problem with ground clearance (although it was never taken properly off-road).

I got a call from my sister yesterday afternoon during the "Great Scottish Disaster" to say that she was the only vehicle in her vicinity to get anywhere, particularly on hills. The roads yesterday were the worst that I have seen in 30 years of driving and I knew that the Subaru would cope. Mind you, I didn't have a problem myself yesterday in the FL2 - it's been faultless in the snow and ice this winter

I only got the FL2, instead of another Outback, because I just fancied what was a new model at the time

I had a 07 reg 3.ltr Outback and it was an excellent car in every way.

The plastic inside the car was a bit cheap and nasty and it was expensive
to insure and service. I will not talk about the MPG I got from it

I traded it in the summer of 2009 for an RS6 Avant

I jumped from the pan into the fire !!!!!!

I had a 3 litre Outback before the fl2. Nice car but no contest, the fl2 could pick it up and carry it. The Outback was a pussy off road and used more fuel. I took the Outback to several off road areas and it got stuck in places the fl2 has absolutely no trouble with. I got sick of limping out the 'ladies' exit. Just my experience with it. Mike

Yes... I had a Auto Outback 3ltr here in Oz My wife wrote it off before we got the Freelander 2.

It was a lovely car, great on road and fun on the beach, but show it a mild incline and its Game Over. I took it on some gravel tracks, and anything more than 15 degrees and forget it.

The Outback also had very little torque down low and then a rush once the revs picked up. Not ideal for off road.

I'd pick the Freelander any day.