2010 Subaru Outback Diesel
November 2, 2009 by Matt Brogan
Update: Subaru Outback Diesel Review.
Subaru’s first diesel-powered vehicle is on sale today: the turbocharged Outback 2.0D .
Mated to Subaru’s renowned Symmetrical All-Wheel Drive system, Outback 2.0D offers outstanding fuel economy and low emissions, already meeting strict EURO 5 standards.
It is believed to be the world’s first flat boxer diesel engine for a passenger car and consumes just 6.4L/100km in the combined cycle, while producing just 160g/km of CO2.
Local testing indicates a range in excess of 1100 kilometres is achievable with steady freeway driving.
The Outback 2.0D models offer the same outstanding five-star safety as every Subaru.
Three models are available: the Outback 2.0D, the 2.0D Premium and 2.0D Premium with satellite navigation (SatNav).
The new 2.0D engine produces 110kW of power at 3600 rpm and 350Nm of torque between 1800-2400 rpm.
Even at just 1600 rpm, the engine delivers 300 Nm of torque for incredible low-down pulling power.
As with all four-cylinder Outback models, the first service is now at 12,500 kilometres/six months.
Outback 2.0D shares the same spacious new cabin, refined ride and multiple engineering changes as petrol versions.
Outback 2.0D is priced from $40,490 Manufacturer’s List Price (MLP)*. The diesel range topping Outback Premium with SatNav is $46,490.
“These are the most fuel efficient new generation Subarus on the Australian market,” said Nick Senior, Managing Director, Subaru Australia. “We’ve already had huge interest from people seeking a luxurious drive with the outstanding economic benefits of this diesel engine.
“Outback 2.0D reinforces our environmental and fuel economy credentials, which have already been highlighted by significant efficiency gains across the entire new generation Liberty and Outback ranges.
“Depending upon the level of customer interest in the coming months, we will be carefully considering extending the engine’s availability to some other models in the Subaru range.
“We estimate that driving 25,000 kilometres a year at $90 per tank of diesel would save approximately $2500 over 20 months on an equivalent petrol car.
“It’s a significant saving and one of the many positive facts that will bring new buyers to the Subaru brand.”
Widely respected for its Symmetrical All-Wheel Drive ability, Outback now has the extra ingredient of a turbocharged diesel engine plus more leg and shoulder room, while adding even more comfort and features to its formidable reputation.
Australia’s original crossover wagon maintains its super-safe status with new features including a driver’s knee SRS airbag and a cradle that helps cocoon the engine from the reinforced passenger cabin in heavy frontal crashes.
Subaru’s safety commitment is underlined by Outback’s achievement of the highest five-star occupant safety rating in independent crashworthiness testing conducted by the Australasian New Car Assessment Program (ANCAP). It also gets a three-star pedestrian rating.
Among the Outback 2.0D highlights:
• Incredible fuel economy and range
• Six-speed manual
• New platform produces significant space and safety benefits
• Wider, longer cabin for greater leg and shoulder room – three adults easily fit the rear seat
• ECO gauge encourages economical driving
• Highest five-star ANCAP safety rating across the range – addition of driver’s knee SRS airbag; cabin strengthened in strategic areas
• Greater cargo carrying capacity
• Reversing camera for Outback 2.0D Premium when fitted with factory satellite navigation (SatNav)
• Sash windows for greater noise suppression and security
• New single-cradle engine bay design – reduces noise, enhances safety and refines ride and stability
• Wider opening doors for easier access
• Sophisticated Symmetrical All-Wheel Drive for added driving pleasure and safety
• Voice activation system on factory-fitted SatNav for easy function selection
• Standard dual zone air conditioning
• Electric park brake
• DataDot security – in line with the entire Subaru range
• First service at 12,500 kilometres/six months
• Self-levelling rear suspension
The new generation Outback 2.0D line-up comprises:
• Outback 2.0D – with six-speed manual transmission
• Outback 2.0D Premium – includes leather trim, electric sunroof and rear air vents
• Outback 2.0D Premium with SatNav –includes DVD, reversing camera and Bluetooth compatibility
With Subaru Australia
Print it: 
butterface :(
Can’t wait to hear a review of this one… The first Subie diesel.
Also, is the diesel going to available with an Auto? From what is here, only seems to be manual.
I don’t think you can really say “just” 160 grams of Co2 for a 2.0 diesel anymore. Not when you can get a 3 Series that does 109.
Why no automatic? I expect the lack of automatic will be a big put off for many. Is it really so hard to have one?
Alex, its not that engineering an auto/diesel is hard, but it simply doesnt translate into real world economy. Most automatics will use about 10% more fuel then a manual(in a petrol).
Put an automatic behind a diesel, and consumption goes up around 20%!(or more),than a manual. Have a look and its the same with almost every car.
Co2 emissions in an auto/diesel are usualy near or above that of a petrol/manual.
Any company that does a auto/diesel is simply playing on the ignorance of those that are buying their cars.
Fuel economy isn’t the only reason to buy a diesel, performance, especially with a heavily loaded or tow vehicle is a big motivator for people to buy diesels. Also not all autos are created equal. The difference in fuel consumption between a manual and DSG VW group diesel is not 20%.
Karl part of what you say is true , but if the manufacturers bother to get the correct gearbox for the vehilce then the a diesel auto is actually better all round than the manual. A properly set up Diesel Auto will keep the engine spinning at it’s best rev range, right in the meat of it’s torque curve. Generally changing up at the end of the curve (say in this case 2400rpm) and when the next gear comes on the engine is spinning at the start of peak (1900). Perfect set not reving out to 3500rpm like so many manuals get driven.
The European have no trouble getting Euro 4 Auto Diesels, but they do use specific Diesel Boxes. The biggst problem for the Japanese is that fact that they tend to not have access / desire to spend the research on sorting it out.
I should point out that I’m not talking about DSG’s.
Also manuals consumption can always go high if a lazy driver wont shift properly. I’m aware that the transmission doesn’t stop the car from passing emissions testing, but the auto will still use alot more fuel.
Even with keeping the revs closer to the ideal shift points, it still doesnt come close to making up the loss from the torque converter.
Yes, you can make a case to buy a diesel based on performance if you HAVE to have the auto, but your better of taking the manual and have the fantastic economy as well.
learn to drive a manual BUDDY!! LOL
Yeah, thanks for your incredibly helpful input Alby but I already know how to drive a manual. But surely you see where I’m coming from; it’s a Subaru station wagon. A family car rather than a drivers car. Manuals are still my favourite gearboxes but as far as I’m concerned, on a car like this (family wagon), an automatic would just be so much more suitable.
The fact is that automatics are a definite must for many families and that’s what my point was. If you read some of the other comments here, you’ll see that I’m not the only one who thinks so.
For the issue of looks, give me a Skoda Octavia Scout please. I know they both drive well, are roomy and have very economical/resonably powerful/torquey engines but I couldn’t buy a car that looks like the Outback does. Plus, the interior plastics are as hard as rocks and it’s actually somewhat expensive (especially considering the base version is $40k plus on-roads and the $1k cheaper Scout comes with more equipment as standard…).
Or I could spend $20k more on a Volvo XC70 or a further $40k on an Audi Allroad…
Oh , having owned a liberty 3.0r wagon , iam appalled at its unco looks , hell even a skoda scout looks good next to this .
Overseas reports are not so favourable towards this engine , lacks grunt .
Seen a couple of liberty/outbacks on the road and it doesn’t get any better looking , dark colour if you want one , but it will handle just as good as the 08 model .
The Outback isnt the preetiest car on the road but the Skoda Octavia Scout looks like it belongs in the mid 90’s, especially from the side and rear. Nor is the interior as roomy as the Outback and for those who go offroad the 210mm ground clearance will ensure that it will keep going places that the Scout with just 180mm cant.
The Subie is also a safer car in a collosion with 5 stars vs 4 for for an Octavia plus the basic chassis architecture in the Skoda is old.
The Subara also will hold a much stronger resale value than a Skoda and prove to be mechanically stonger.
The Octavia Scout does not have full time AWD like the Subaru. It has the VW part-time mode. From reviews I have read, the Scout ride is not great and it’s handling is not up with the Subaru. Last time I checked, it cost more. I was thinking of buying one because Subaru were so slow bringing out the diesel. I am disappointed that the Subaru doesn’t have an auto, though.
I wonder if this engine will find its way into Subarus cheaper offerings as well. An AWD diesel car could be quite a useful package. Given that many Subaru owners keep their cars beyond 500,000 km, the economies may very well pay for themselves.
(I am not aware if modern Subarus are as durable (or not) as the old ones where)
And the ‘Cloth’ seats are attrocious, more like velour !! Do we really need an electric handbrake, not as bad as a ‘foot’ handbrake I suppose(Hello Hyundai/Kia). Glad I ordered my Octavia Scout.
Gee a very narrow price band between the bottom of the range and the top of the range, I predict the top of the range versions will be the most popular.
The fuel consumption penalty for an automatic diesel is no more than for a petrol. The reason no automatic is available is that the diesels are basically for Europe, where automatic is not such a priority. So the engineering hasn’t been done yet, and any automatic would need to be able to handle the diesel’s torque. Not sure id this is an issue with Subaru’s new CVT.
Manual diesels can be a problem for unfamiliar drivers, as they run out of puff at 4500rpm in third gear right in the middle of an overtaking manouvre. The natural reaction in a petrol car when this happens is to change down, but in a diesel you need to change UP. Auto diesels are the answer, and until Subaru can supply one they’ll have a problem with the sales rate.
The real world penalty is larger than the ADR would suggest, look at the results of road tests of autos vs manual diesels.
Manuals are a much better option, they also have a much better oppotunity to further improve the consumption if you drive it properly(keep the revs low).
I’ve got to agree about the european market and driving style though.
Subarus first diesel???? I could be wrong, but I’m pretty sure Top Gear used a DIESESL legacy wagon in their economy race to Brighton. They kept comenting on how awful the motor was.
Yep same motor , in uk had it 18 months ago in previous model liberty , and same comments a slug .
Unfortunately by the time Subaru got around to sticking a diesel in , they have totally cocked up the exterior. Seen a few on the road now and that front end and slabs of wheel arches are just too ungainly. My old 97 Outback looked positively pretty in comparison. Sorry Subaru, I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt and wait till I saw these in the flesh; a quick Tribeca type sheet metal rehash is now necessary. By all means try to push the design envelope, but don’t forget aesthetics.
Yeah i cant see a boxer design being too flash with a diesel. Bigger exhaust manifold, bigger intake manifold, more vibration, maybe two injection rails (not common anymore) or longer injector pipes. Dont see the point really in a boxer diesel except as a Subaru gimmick.
The boxer layout is not a ‘Subaru gimmick’. Its purpose is to allow a longitudinal engine orientation while maintaining a short engine bay. A longitudinal engine layout is easier to package with the type of four wheel drive system (that is, one that uses a geared centre differential) used on many Subarus such as this Outback.
It is a gimmick. Its unnecessary and complicates the intake and exhaust plumbing, especially on a turbocharged diesel – and the camshaft drive mechanism as well. Nothing wrong with the old tried and trued ‘east west’ layout with an inline or vee configuration. I dont see any more VW boxer engines, except for Porsche. Worked well on the old air cooled beetles for the war, but not for modern water cooled engines. I think they will have reliability problems with this configuration and the cylinder pressures generated by a turbo diesel. Time will tell.
Yeah you’re right, that boxer layout that Subaru persists with is no good, especially the turbos.
Hang on, what was the 2006 and 2008 International Engine of the Year?
As for supposed reliability problems, Subaru don’t exactly have a bad reputation in this area so one would assume they have done the numbers with regards to pressures and the like and built the engine accordingly. As you say, time will tell.
Speak to some of the people that have had early engine failures in the 2.5lt and ask them if they think Subaru have a bad reputation.. Look at the reliability studies, they are nowhere near the other Jap brands. Mitsubishi Evo’s take a lot more power on standard internals from only 2.0lt. The boxer design is not as strong as an inline 4, especially with the higher pressures and torque inside a diesel. I’ll steer clear thanks.
you guys obviously have NO engineering knowledge at all!!
as the boxer engine is the best internally balanced engine design there is,
because of the counteracting pistons running horizontal to each other irons out
any natural internal vibration, also they have a shorter stronger crankshaft so dont need counterbalance shafts!!! are also a more compact lower centre of gravity
engine!, get your facts right before you comment, plus boxer engines sound better
than a flat boring sounding in line 4, all these reasons are why porsche and suberu
and now toyota use this design!!as even toyota has admited to being envious of the subaru design,,,
OSU811, why are you saying “you guys obviously have NO engineering knowledge at all” when I agree with you in that these are good engines?
OSU811 is correct with his technical brief of the boxer engine. Their extremely tough, reliable and smooth at the same time.
Subaru engines are extremely durable, they wont have a problem with the diesel.
Boxer engines arent used so much anymore because they’re expensive and relatively complicated, the inline east-west is cheap, among other advantages.
Boxer engines, as shown by Porsche and Subaru, allow for an extremely low centre of gravity. They are also quite compact and VERY smooth -by nature of the way the cylinders move-.
The boxer engines, along with symmetrical AWD are NOT a gimmick, shown by countless reviews and loving owners.
Subaru engines used to be durable, not any more. Google it – http://www.stiblog.com/article.....u-failure/ is an example.
Its well known now in the tuning industry that the old 2.0 engine was vastly superior to the current open deck block 2.5 in the WRX.
The 2.5 is fitted with very weak pistons for a turbo motor, a simple boost upgrade of 4psi is enough to cause major damage.
Subaru has always had some sort of engine fault from the common leaking/blown head gaskets to the mass recalls in the 90’s with lifter problems with the RS. Then there have been clutch and gearbox dramas galore.
But what I will say is the older generation of Subarus are vastly better built and engineered cars. Todays models are over rated and mid field with other Japanese makers!
The previous model Liberty 3.0 is a keeper though!
Ahhh, Subaru a small undercapitalised manufacturer does not have the engineering resources to do a CVT diesel… yet. Apparently a CVT diesel is coming but it is about 12 to 18 months away. The drivetrain will also find its way into Liberty, Forester and Impreza. The CVT diesel will be a great drivetrain, worth waiting for. As a current Liberty owner, I’ll wait for this drivetrain to be widely available.. and I hope I come to terms with the Liberty/Outback godawful styling inside and out. Also, the soft feel slush mould dash and door plastics are gone replaced with hard plastics. Please Subaru, do something about your styling the latest efforts have been stinkers.
Subaru might be small, their parent company has approx 20 Billion Australian dollars in revenue per annum. Or they could sue the CVT from Toyota, as Toyota have a 17% share in Subaru so it would be in their interest to assit in development.
Why would Subaru want to Sue Toyota?
sorry dude, typing to fast, meant to say use, same letters, different placement
The current CVT is capped by its torque rating, still a flaw most CVT manufacturers are trying to get rid off. This is why the CVT is not offered with the turbo petrol or the diesel.
I personally think CVT’s on low torque 4 cylinder engines are a bad match as they thrive for revs, but on a larger engine like the current 3.5 Nissan Maxima and Murano they are brilliant from personal experience!
The diesel was manufactured for Europe, where Subaru is attempting to gain some market impact. (In Europe, no diesel = no sales). Europeans like to change gear themselves, so don’t buy autos. Therefore, if you are making a Diesel for Europe, and you are a small (niche?) manufacturer that insists on AWD, then you build the gearbox that will sell the most – ie manual.
Americans don’t buy diesel cars. America is Subaru’s biggest market, so if they aren’t going to buy it then there is no point building an auto; however, Australia is Subaru’s second largest export market, so if we want one it will come eventually (no one else gets the Exiga).
As for the boxer being a gimmick – All Subaru engines are boxers for a variety of marketing and sound engineering reasons. To make their diesel anything else (ie inline 4 etc) would be a detriment to years of marketing/branding.
And yes, I drive a Subaru and keenly await my new Outback (a petrol CVT – can’t wait the 18 months to replace my current model as my wife wants the new one now)
I know the Mazda 6 wagon doesn’t have AWD but I would rather that than the Liberty…more powerful diesel as well 2.2ltr 136 kW @ 3,500 rpm and 400Nm @ 1,800-3,000 rpm and the 6 wagon looks heaps better than the Sub
The Mazda is a better quality vehicle and dynamically usually runs circles around Subaru products.
Clearly you are dyslexic and got it back to front. Let me fix it for you:
The Subaru is a better quality vehicle and dynamically usually runs circles around Mazda products.
There that’s correct now.
Mr moderator I like your style…
Auto diesels are commonplace in Europe. Tend to be in higher echelon vehicles – you couldn’t sell many MB or BMW diesels for the well-heeled without auto.
I always drive manuals in petrol engines but diesels may as well be autos to me as there is no point reving the engine out & changing down to slow down usually puts you through the windscreen.
Now Subaru have finally done it , with a vehicle that looks like a beetle and moves like a slug.
Anyone who’d buy this must be unaware of the Mazda CX7 diesel, not to mention the latest
offerings from Kia and Hyundai.
I have driven the new diesel outback a couple of times already, at first I though its a typical diesel (no top end power and small power band),
but the second time, driving it normally in normal conditions, I really appreciated its strong mid range torque for moving around traffic and accelarating strongly on the highway, its also very smooth and quiet!!! for a diesel, with a good well matched 6 speed manual box (i dont like autos anyway)very little lag too.. I actually like the new shape in the outback i think the styling suits it more than the liberty, and the extra space is appreciated! plus the bonnet scoop gives it a tougher stance, also for a full size family awd wagon to be able to avg less than 6.0l/100km and still have enough power to get along nicely is amazing!!
Hey OSU, have a look at the subaru crankshaft and where the crankpins are. I learnt something when I looked at a pic of one, they are not balanced and each piston pair dont actually move backwards and forwards together like a true boxer, ie the front two are both at TDC when the rear two are both at BDC. Not to mention the fact that the main bearings cannot be cradled like an inline 4 due to another two rods / pistons being in the way. Your other comment about the short crank, although better for torsional harmonics allows less room for bearing journals, and makes razor thin counterbalances. Another problem is uneven wear on the bores, as the weight of the pistons and rods is constantly on the bottom side due to the engine being flat. Anyone with a bit of engineering knowledge and an open mind can see this for themselves.
Further to my other email, all V6 and V8 engine banks are 30 or 45 degrees from vertical as well.
considering I have seen and driven plenty of subaru’s with boxer engines done 400,000km and never been rebuilt just serviced and driven and are still not consuming oil!, you must be wrong, it doesnt matter which way the pistons are facing in the eng bay they are all still going up and down the cylinder bore!!!!!
Yes older Subarus with much lower outputs are very long lived, except for valve cover and head gasket leaks due to the heads laying on their sides. My point about the crank, look at a pic! Its all Marketing BS. As things have evolved the Mitsubishi Evo (and most other inline 4’s) are much more robust especially when boost and outputs are raised.
Robin
I think you are are confusing the issue. The first 2 cylinders are balanced and the last 2 are balanced. No need for big counterweights and counter rotating balance shafts. Due to the 4 stroke engine, you will always have the charastic boxer noise.
W.R.T. bore wear, I think you are confusing some vague untested theory with reality. Remember that engines use a thing called oil. Its a lubricant.
Very few engines have perfectly vertical bores. Most Front wheel drive engines lean over a little bit forward or backwards . my old RWD Toyota 3K engine was on a 20 degree angle and the Peugeot X engines used to be at a 45 degree angle. Porsche and Volkswagen engines have been have been horizontal since they started. Radial plane engines have cylinders at all sorts of angles. There is no trend for accelerated bore wear in any of these situations.
I would double check your facts before making a claim like this.
Yes, Valiant had the slant-6 also – a great engine for its time, but the net effect of 45 degrees is 0.71 that of 90 degrees – less. No matter how much oil or whatever, a piston laying flat is going to eventually wear out the lower side quicker than the top. Just like Scotty says you cannot change the laws of physics. Anyway my point is there is nothing wrong with inline-4 and boxer just introduces other ‘challenges’ that are unnecessary and of little benefit. Thats why the design is starting to show flaws with modern outputs. Have a look a the link I posted above. A turbo diesel has much higher BMEP and in my OPINION its going to show up in this engine. Unnecessary complication of an already proven design inline design.
The boxer engine design makes it harder to lubricate the cylinder walls uniformly, explains why boxer engines are prone to piston slap!
What about the cost of production compared to an in line 4? 2 heads, 2 exhaust manifolds, various other accessories, added weight, size, etc.
Robin the boxer engine is the simplest and one the least complicated configurations. If your concerned about durability and complications I would be focussing on the VW Groups Supercharged and Turbocharged small capacity high output engines.
If you go regional you will find plenty of newer and older high km boxer engines out their running sweet without blowing fumes or causing reliability issues.
Porsches have been producing high output boxers for decades without the potential wear issue you refer, not to mention the aviation industry which run boxer engines for their reliability, low vibration and smoothness as well.
Very interesting comment from a lot of people who havn’t driven the car yet. After having a Tiguan diesel on order I’m now changing my mind and buying an Outback.
Yes it could have a bit more punch down low but those who have owned 2 litre class diesels will know that it’s somewhat attributable to the engine being tight from new.Having run two golf diesels, and a caddy diesel, my experience was that they needed 20K plus of run in for a noticable increase in low down drivability.
I don’t like aspects of the interior. The cloth apholstry sucks but who cares once the sheepskin goes on. And the bright silver trim is very fixable with a water transfer paint process. What would you like? Walnut? Carbon Fibre? Whatever.
It will be interesting to see how I feel in a few months but for now for what I want it looks pretty good.
My god …….that is one ugly car
Boy am I a stupid idiot, I thought this was the Skoda post, sorry.
Two family members have bought the 2010 one a legacy premium 2.5i and the other an outback. I have an old 2001 Legacy GT.
The new legacy handles very nice and is way – way better regarding interior seating space and positioning. The CVT which I was not overly thrilled about given my experience with the Nissan CVT’s – but I’ve driven the 2010 Legacy quite a bit and will say the Subaru CVT is far superior compared to the Nissan CVT. I still wouldn’t tow with the CVT though. I have a 5spd manual in my 2001 and we have towed all over the Westcoast of US CA – Oregon – Washington etc.
The 2010 outback is more “SUV” like a bit ugly for sure but a very nice SUV alternative and quite capable one at that.
The whole flat engine argument is really silly given I think anyone would be hard pressed to claim premature engine failure in any small quality car these days VW – Subaru – BMW etc they don’t wear out very easily generally other bits fail first.
As for the flat 4 there is one aspect that does make them more durable than strait 4s. The drive shaft is supported by two additional main bearings resulting in a very flex resistant package that results in a much tougher engine than a standard strait 4. There is a very good reason aircraft engines are flat / horizontal design the primary reason for this is the additional durability of the engine the counter balancing effect of opposing pistons for a lighter stronger engine etc.
The inline 4 infact all of the inline engines are popular for two reasons – #1 simplicity and cost of building them and #2 if de tuned they can run for a very long time ie the old Toyota inline 4’s would out last the car they were in.
A proper flat 4 diesel paired to the CVT would give far superior milege vs a 6spd manual but I would never want to tow with a cvt.