Subaru Has A Disinformation Problem

Vol. 10

Subaru has a pattern of communicating inaccurate, incomplete, or misleading information about its products. In a best case scenario, this fails their customers because it doesn’t allow them to learn how their cars work, then go onto to get the most out of them. In a worst case scenario, this puts their customers’ lives at risk by encouraging them to rely on their vehicles in inappropriate circumstances. 

I hate that I have to the be the one to say this. I’m a former Subaru owner, and routinely recommend vehicles like the Crosstrek, Forester, Outback, and Ascent to my readers. I think Subaru makes really good cars that combine a lot of value, with just enough bad weather and dirt road capability to give drivers a really welcome amount of versatility. But, with the release of its new Wilderness range of vehicles—which supposedly add some more off-road capability—I think it’s also worth highlighting the ways in which Subaru presents disinformation about its products. 

Roof Rack Load Capacity

“The Outback Wilderness also utilizes a more utilitarian fixed ladder-type roof rack system, with an exceptional static load limit of 700 lbs, allowing adventurers to safely use a roof-top tent on the trail,” reads the press release accompanying the release of the new Outback Wilderness. "The ladder-type roof rails add flexibility to fit a wider variety of roof racking accessories and contribute to the adventurous spirit.”

The rub there is the word “static.” 700 pounds is the amount of weight the new rack is designed to support only when the car is standing still. How much weight can the roof handle when the car is in motion? I visited the Subaru website, and read a bunch of news articles on car websites like MotorTrend to try and find out, but that dynamic load rating number was nowhere to be found. So, I emailed my old friend Jessica, who handles PR for the company. The answer? 200 pounds. 

A 200 pound dynamic load rating is actually really impressive. Most normal cars and SUVs, including other Subarus, are typically only rated for 150 pounds or less. Given that the average weight of the unsightly piles of canvas that make up most rooftop tents comes in somewhere around 150 pounds or more, then Subaru’s claim that this new trim level can “safely use a roof-top tent on the trail,” is entirely truthful. 

The trouble is that 200 pounds is an awful lot less than 700, and that dynamic load rating was nowhere to be found in any material generated around the Outback Wilderness’ release. Attempting to carry more than 200 pounds (god forbid 700) on the roof of that car while it’s in motion would likely lead to a disaster during an emergency avoidance maneuver, will cause premature wear to the vehicle if used like that regularly, and could contribute to a rollover off-road. 

So why is Subaru promoting the static, rather than the dynamic number? 

Ground Clearance

“The 2022 Outback Wilderness boasts a class-leading 9.5-inch ground clearance, a nearly one-inch increase over the already impressive standard model,” reads the press release. “The suspension has been tuned for improved stability on rough terrain while retaining ride comfort and handling performance on the open road. The front and rear shock absorbers and springs were increased in length to provide more ground clearance and suspension travel. The increased ground clearance, along with redesigned front and rear bumpers, contribute to the vehicle’s ability to navigate rough or uneven terrain.”

When it comes to ground clearance, 9.5 inches is a really impressive number. Compare that to, say, a Toyota Tacoma TRD Pro, which has only  9.4 inches of ground clearance, and you could be forgiven for coming to the conclusion that the Subaru may be capable of keeping up with that range-topping Taco over challenging off-road obstacles. The thing is, you’d be wrong. 

Subarus are able to return such impressive ground clearance numbers because they use independent suspension front and rear. That’s an excellent arrangement for ride quality, and on-road handling. In contrast, most body-on-frame trucks and SUVs like the Tacoma are equipped with a stick axle at the rear. That delivers superior articulation off-road, and is generally capable of supporting more weight. But, where independent rear suspension sees the rear differential mounted to the frame, up high and out of the way, stick axles house their differentials in large casings within the axle itself. The lowest point on the center line of Tacomas and similar trucks (the point where ground clearance is measured), will be the bottom of that differential housing. Therefore, the ground clearance measurement on trucks and SUVs is entirely determined by tire size. Stock, a Tacoma TRD Pro is fitted with 30.5 inch tires. Fit 33s to that Taco, and its ground clearance will increase to 10.65 inches. 

But that’s not important, because ground clearance is a largely irrelevant number. The thing that determines a vehicle’s ability to clear large obstacles off road isn’t how tucked up the components along its center line are, it’s the vehicle’s approach, breakover and departure angles. I wrote about all that at length in this article. 

So, can an Outback Wilderness, with its impressive 9.5 inches of ground clearance, clear larger obstacles than a Taco TRD Pro? Of course not. Where approach, breakover, and departure angles on the Subie are 20, 21.2, and 23.6 degrees respectively, those angles on the Tacoma (a vehicle which suffers from exceptionally poor angles in stock form) are 29, 23.5, and 23 degrees. Again, a 33-inch tire will dramatically improve those. The tires on the Outback Wilderness are 28.6 inches in diameter. It’s unlikely that even a 30-inch would fit. 

As long as I’ve been writing about cars (coming up on 20 years now!), Subaru has emphasized that ground clearance number above all other specs. That’s caused it to become so common, that you’ll see even professional car reviewers reference ground clearance specs while reviewing real 4x4s. As I just described, that’s plain silly, they may as well just quote the tire size. But it’s also a good demonstration of how widely disinformation can spread if us journalist types don’t work to counteract it. 

All-Wheel Drive

I’ve written at length about the differences between four-wheel and all-wheel drive on numerous occasions. So forgive me if I’m brief, and draw heavily on the work of others. 

The short recap is that four-wheel drive matches the speeds of the front and rear axles when engaged. All-wheel drive, in the absence of other technologies, sends all its power to the wheel with the least traction. That makes 4WD a capability enhancer—it boosts your ability to accelerate through slippery conditions—and AWD a safety enhancer—with all the power being lost to the wheel with least traction, the other three remain free to retain grip. 

To counteract AWD’s innate lack of capability, Subaru fits CVT-equipped models (aside from the WRX) with a multi-plate clutch that operates in continuous slip, and which nominally apportions power 60/40, front/rear. If your front wheels begin to lose traction, that clutch can apportion more power to the rear axle. It’s unclear how much apportionment can be achieved by this system, and I’ve looked absolutely everywhere for those numbers. 

There appears to be some “active” nature to the software that controls this system in that it can, in a very limited way, identify driving conditions, and apportion power proactively, before wheel slip occurs. The only example I can think of for this function is acceleration from a dead stop. If you watch side-on videos of an Outback or similar accelerating from a stop on a loose surface, all of its wheels appear to spin at equal speeds. There is no detailed information available anywhere on the software logic that makes this determination, or other circumstances  in which it may be employed. 

What the differentials, couplings, clutches, and similar doodads that split torque evenly front-to-rear on 4WD vehicles, and provide some apportionment on AWD ones are unable to do is match wheel speeds across axles. That’s traditionally been the job of limited-slip, or locking axle diffs. Both have their limitations, and so even the most capable 4x4s like Land Cruisers and Land Rovers have replaced them with electronic, ABS-based alternatives in recent decades. All the traction, without losing steering, or exploding CVs. 

And Subaru uses this technology too! By employing the ABS system’s ability to individually monitor and alter wheel speeds, Subarus are able to add back in some of the wheel speed matching abilities of true-4WD, and even locking axle diffs, all without any driver involvement. It’s extraordinary that this capability is available on economy crossovers, but again, Subaru does not communicate to its buyers the way this system works. 

Take these two videos from The Fast Lane, which I encourage you to watch in their entire length. While the Subaru is able to provide a significant level of wheel speed matching, and therefore climb off rollers even when three wheels are without traction, that capability only appears to exist when the wheel with most traction has enough of that to rotate without spinning. Put that same wheel on a loose surface, and the Subaru appears to refuse to power it. 

This limitation stands in contrast to not only mechanical 4WD and locking diffs, but also the ABS-based systems on more purpose-built off-roaders. Take this video of the 200-series Land Cruiser I built for my wife. When you see it climbing through those moguls, you’ll note that the back, right wheel loses traction and spins up, but is still able to complete the climb. I’d forgotten to lock the center diff for that shot, but the AWD (albeit with the aid of the Land Cruiser’s Torsen center diff) and ABS-based traction aids were still able to make progress. 

Given similar conditions, why was the Subaru unable to proportion power? Neither I, nor the TFL video hosts are able to tell you that, because Subaru won’t tell us, or you. Given that AWD is virtually synonymous with the Subaru badge, this is very problematic. We know that the system is significantly less capable than true 4WD, and even other AWD systems on rival crossovers. But we don’t know to what degree. 

X-Mode

In that same vein, you’ll note the TFL hosts struggling to communicate what Subaru’s X-Mode does, outside of its vague marketing claims. There’s no information available on how it actually functions from any source, beyond vague claims that it somehow boosts traction, hill-climbing, and hill-descent capability. 

Having used it, my anecdotal assumption is that pushing the X-Mode button turns up the ABS-based wheel speed matching (how, and to what degree?), enables hill descent control, and tells the CVT to remain in a lower gear ratio. But man, I’d love some real information detailing those functions. 

Wilderness Recovery Points

Vehicle recovery—the act of getting something stuck, unstuck—involves thousands of pounds of force, and is therefore incredibly dangerous. So, real 4X4s come equipped with rated recovery points designed to safely attach recovery gear. Or, drivers fit those from the aftermarket. 

The new Outback Wilderness highlights the location of its recovery points with gold trim pieces. But those covers remove to reveal only screw holes, into which you must thread the one tow eyelet included with the vehicle. No information is available anywhere about the working load limit, or minimum breaking strength of either that attachment point, or the eyelet itself. This is incredibly problematic. Is it safe to perform a kinetic recovery using one of these points? Is it safe to pull on one using another vehicle’s winch? There’s no way to know. So I’d say it’s safe to assume it’s not. 

If I was in a position where I needed to use one of my properly equipped vehicles to recover a Subaru from its front, I’d want to create a bridle using a static line running between the two “recovery” points on the front of the Outback Wilderness, to split the load between them, and minimize the odds of something breaking, and come shooting towards my truck. But the Wilderness only includes one tow eyelet. I encourage all buyers to purchase an extra one. 

If I was to use one of my properly equipped vehicles to recover a Subaru from the rear, I’d hope that the Subaru was equipped with a two-inch tow receiver, into which I’d insert one of my own purpose-built, safety-rated recovery points (which I carry with me at all times for the purpose of recovering other vehicles). But such a receiver can only be added to a Subaru in the aftermarket. Sure, a trip to U-Haul to buy and have mounted the right tow hitch is quick and cheap, but it is not communicated to Subaru buyers that this is a more important first-modification than throwing the stock tires in the dump, and replacing them with a set of Falken Wildpeak A/T Trails (the only all-terrain tire designed to work on crossovers). Also, why isn’t the Wilderness equipped with that tire? 

My concern here is that the fancy gold trim provides the appearance of a proper recovery point, without the presence of an actual recovery point. People can and do die trying to recovery vehicles using inadequate equipment. 

Active Torque Vectoring

Subaru’s press release reads: “In addition to the increased off-road capability, the Outback Wilderness delivers the optimal blend of SUV capability and car-like ride and handling that the legendary SUV is known for with help from standard features including Active Torque Vectoring…”

Elsewhere, it’s explained that this system works by individually applying the inside, rear brake on corner entry, to enhance turn-in speed and feel on the road. This is another neat technology that’s actually pretty effective, but which is communicated inaccurately. 

You see, torque vectoring is an entirely different technology, which uses clutches within a differential to actively send power to the wheel with the most traction, boosting a vehicle’s potential to accelerate. In a rear-diff, on a high-performance vehicle like a Lexus RC-F, the torque vectoring differential directs power to the outside rear wheel as the driver applies gas to exit a corner. Because that outside rear wheel has the most traction, this ensures that power is not wasted spinning up the inside rear wheel, which would also have the effect of breaking traction. So, the so-equipped RC-F is able to accelerate harder, earlier in the corner, with more control. 

If that doesn’t sound like tweaking the rear inside brake caliper on turn-in, you’re not wrong. And this is indicative of another problem that appears throughout the rest of Subaru’s communication about its vehicles’ capabilities. There, you’ll see a lot of talk about sending torque to the wheels with the most traction. But nowhere on any CVT-equipped Subaru is this actually achieved. Instead, some wheel speed matching is managed through individual brake caliper actuation. To say that a Crosstrek, Forester, Outback, or Ascent actively vectors torque, or directs power in any way beyond front-to-rear is simply false. 

What This Means In The Real World

Why is this problematic? Let’s go back to that very first paragraph: In a best case scenario, this fails their customers because it doesn’t allow them to learn how their cars work, then go onto to get the most out of them. In a worst case scenario, this puts their customers’ lives at risk by encouraging them to rely on their vehicles in inappropriate circumstances. 

Take this conversation I had on Instagram with one of my readers earlier today, which I’m sharing here with permission. Joelle is the kind of passionate outdoorsperson who’s working on making stuff like trail running and skiing her career—she’s an ambassador for Arc’Teryx’s retail location in Portland. In short, she’s essentially a caricature of a Subaru customer. 

Joelle: I will say I am continually impressed by my outback’s suspension. Durability and performance have been excellent even after 155k. Regularly have been parked at remote trail heads where the only other vehicles are TRD Tacoma’s, Jeep’s, or other outbacks. If you find someone who knows what they’re talking about, I’d be super curious to see what makes these cars so darn versatile!

Wes: Do you think it's as capable as, say, one of those Tacomas?

Joelle: My partner has a Tacoma. Custom suspension kit. The top of the line tires. It’s never gone anywhere my outback couldn’t. Same goes for my dads Jeep! I think if someone were doing the Baja, rock crawling, and deep snow adventures in their vehicle, they wouldn’t be successful in an outback. But my stock outback has maneuvered some pretty gnarly roads!

Wes: So you wouldn't hesitate to take one beyond cell phone reception range or use one to tackle like steep climbs or some mud?

Joelle: Oh yeah I wouldn’t hesitate one bit! I wish I had photos of the terrain mine has accomplished. My family has grown up around cars and technical off-roading so some of it comes with experience, but these cars are pretty incredible for being an AWD mid sized sedan or wagon!

Wes: Do you carry a recovery kit (shackles and straps) or a tire repair kit with compressor?

Joelle: I have a tire kit and a small compressor (although I’ve never needed to use it). I don’t think I’ve driven on the kind of terrain where rocks or debris would blow the tire. Other plus could be that they’re relatively lightweight compared to a Tundra. My assumption is this helps with reducing risk of blowouts. With a suspension kit you can fit more aggressive tires too - I’ve heard they’re rather unstoppable at that point!

Wes: Has anyone ever tried to talk you into getting recovery gear?

Joelle: Somewhat. My parents did when I first got my outback. I was excited to see how versatile it was and they told me I should think of being more prepared. I also realized that any damage I sustained while pushing my outback was probably going to be expensive and I’ve taken to finding alternative routes. That decision was more out of precaution than anything else. Reliable car and I would like to get as much use out of it as I can!

Wes: Have you ever aired down on dirt?

Joelle: I have on sand! But I don’t think I’d need to with AT tires. I’ve always tried to put the most aggressive tire I can on my outback, but without a lift the most I can do are like Yokohama geolanders. Which is a joke compared to a true AT tire. I work at a ski resort so I run studs in the winter. I’ve had to plow my way up the mountain a few times and the added traction was nice. There have been mornings where we’ve received 2+ feet and the plow hasn’t run yet. My cars made it every time. Sometimes the AWD sensors are a bit too smart for their own good too. I’ve turned traction control off a time or two to let my tires spin. The computer will notice a lack of traction and keep tires from moving when it would be more beneficial to let more spin.

Wes: So what would your plan be if you got stuck somewhere?

Joelle: To be honest it’s been a while since I’ve taken mine anywhere that was really sketchy. I didn’t have a great game plan at first and so instead of continuing without a plan, I just decided to take it easier. I do own a Spot device so I can send my location to family and or SAR depending on the situation. I got this for mountain running but I use it on road trips too.

Wes: Ok, but you need to go buy a pair of Maxtrax Minis and carry them with you from here on out.

Joelle is using her Outback in situations that are not appropriate, and which could easily lead to her becoming stranded far from cell reception. She carries a satellite communicator, and has a network of friends equipped with more appropriate vehicles, so I’m not too worried about her. But, the fact remains that she’s improperly equipped for the driving conditions she’s facing. And why shouldn’t she be? At no point in the marketing, sales, or ownership experience does Subaru attempt to intercept customers with factual, useful information about the ways in which its vehicles perform. 

All vehicle manufacturers are guilty of highlighting positive news about their products, while covering up the bad. But all of this isn’t a case of someone designing a Toyota Tacoma to return 23 MPG in the EPA’s highway test cycle (in which speeds don’t exceed 60 MPH), then burdening customers with inadequate gearing for the real world. That just costs Taco drivers money, and make the truck they drive perform terribly. Subaru’s problematic history of misleading its customers about off-road capabilities is, in contrast, actually risking lives. 

Dynamic versus static roof loads. Bullshit ground clearance numbers in lieu of genuinely useful angles. An all-wheel drive system without any data on its ability to provide traction. Software that allegedly boosts traction, but appears to work mostly on the power of imagination. Fake recovery points that come without the data you need to use them safely. Active Torque Vectoring that’s anything but…any one of these things alone would be inaccurate, incomplete, or misleading. Together, they add up to what quickly starts to look like a deliberate attempt to deceive consumers. Subarus are good cars. But they’d be better cars in the absence of this disinformation campaign.

How can Subaru fix this? Educating consumers in order to empower them to make more informed purchase decisions is always the right answer. With its new Wilderness range of crossovers, it’s my sincere hope that the brand not only to alters its messaging in the direction of fact, but that it can also find a way to intercept buyers with empowering information or experiences around using its vehicles to do the stuff they see those cars doing in advertisements. Heck, adding some Maxtrax, air compressors, tire repair kits, and rated recovery points to the accessories catalog wouldn’t hurt either. Other brands see consumer empowerment as a key part of their marketing strategy. It’s past time that Subaru does the same.