Subaru has enjoyed phenomenal success the past twenty years, and their sales have been almost explosive in the past 5-8 years. But what’s sometimes forgotten is that Subary had a bad slump right around the time this legacy was sold, and seriously considered exiting the US market. I’ll bet they’re glad they decided to stick it out. And what was the key to their upswing?
We’ll answer that soon. It certainly wasn’t the new legacy, that arrived in 1989. It was a decided departure from the small and quirky cars with which Subaru established itself in the US during the 70s and 80s. The Legacy was squarely aimed at the Camry and Accord, with a new longer platform, smooth styling and the new EJ22 SOHC boxer four. Like all Subarus at the time, AWD was not standard, and in the case of the Legacy, even if the AWD was chosen, there were almost no external outward cues, unlike the Subaru 4WD wagons of yore, with their jacked up suspensions.
So I’ve essentially answered the question: America was not looking for another milquetoast FWD Camcord sedan.
Well, it wasn’t 100% quirk-free, styling-wise. The kick-up on the C-pillar/window was distinctive, although hardly seriously quirky.
The interior looks like it could be from a Toyota of the time. Which also means high quality materials and assembly.
The Legacy sedan does have AWD, but that’s a mighty small little badge down there. Yes, therein lay the problem with the Legacy and Subaru: they were trying to go mainstream, but the market wasn’t buying it.
This is what they wanted, and in 1994, Subaru gave it to them, the Outback. Jack up the Legacy wagon, put on some cladding and fender flares, and hire Crocodile Dundee to sell it. That, and a fateful decision that henceforth, Subaru would only sell AWD vehicles in the US. A very smart move; in a crowded market, they needed to make their brand stand for something distinctive, and the timing was perfect. Subaru sales have been on a steep climb ever since.
But that was still a few years away from when this decidedly non-Outback Legacy tried to compete with the Camry. And almost killed Subaru in the US for trying.
When the folks upgraded to their first Cadillac, they gave us their ’90 Legacy LS, rather than taking a low trade-in credit. A very competent car, joining our Loyale Turbot wagon.
Other than the AWD, you easily could have thought you were in our previous ’84 Camry.
Wound up giving it to a babysitter years later, with 150k miles. Par for the course, had to swap engines after head gasket failure made replacing the 2.2 a wise decision. The body ultimately didn’t last much longer, though.
The first year of the Outback it wasn’t even jacked up, just a Legacy wagon with bigger wheels, round foglights, and the two-tone paint. Second year got the raised suspension.
I had an early Legacy (wagon) as a rental back for a couple of weeks in the early 90’s and the interior was plush and well built but it seemed quite sloooow and every action felt very deliberate. But it got you there, eventually, and felt very solid doing so.
Subaru’s current success with the Crosstrek is just the Outback strategy all over again, 20 years later, and it works equally well for them today: a relatively sedate vehicle raised up by several inches and given interesting exterior differences, only this time the base car is the 2012+ Impreza 5-door rather than the second-generation Legacy wagon.
That story has played out over and over – a small, marginal player just can’t succeed by trying to copy the market leaders. “Me-too” is seldom done as well as the leaders. But to find a niche and mine the hell out of it – that is where the also-rans have found success.
Few, though, have found so much success for so long as Subaru has over the last 20 years.
I still remember back in the 80s when getting a Japanese auto company to build a plant in your state was a huge effen deal. Indiana’s governor Evan Bayh was ripped by more than one commentator, with something like “of all the Japanese companies building plants in the US, you come back with Subaru and Isuzu who are such nobodies that they have to share a factory?” Nobody’s laughing at him now.
Yes. Since then Honda and Toyota have opened plants in the Hoosier state. My wife’s Civic was built in Indiana.
That brings up an interesting memory for me. I was looking at a Honda Passport( aka rebadged Isuzu Rodeo a few years ago) and on the door jamb it said it was made in the Subaru plant. So we have a rebadged Isuzu Rodeo pretending to be a Honda that was made at a Subaru plant.
Subaru and Isuzu operated that plant as a joint venture (Subaru-Isuzu Automotive.). After Isuzu bailed, we were told that the big SIA on the building stood for Subaru Indiana Automotive.
Until recently when Subie really needed max capacity, they were building Camrys there too.
This model of Legacy was my first car! Same colors, even. But mine was fwd, so it was 100% quirk-free. It was extremely solid (even by the time it was handed down to me), handled superbly well for a fwd car, and had great long-haul front seats.
It could’ve been a strong competitor to the contemporaneous boxy Camry. The Legacy was less refined but a lot more fun. Kind of like like the “zoom-zoom” Mazda6 (not sure if Mazdas still have that kind of character).
Anyway, I wouldn’t want to own one today, but it was a magnificent first car: it kept me on the road, and it kept me entertained.
But those damned axle boots…
Probably my favorite Subaru. They still look good today.
A few years before Toyota owned 16.1% of Subaru via Fuji Heavy Industries, General Motors during the early part of the last decade also had a small ownership interest in Subaru much like YES Fiat from that time as well way before Fiat and Chrysler became synonymous with one another. But prior to the 2000s from about the late 1960s through 1999, Nissan had a controlling interest of Subaru via Fuji Heavy Industries. The front end of the early 1990s Subaru Legacy looks almost identical to those of the Toyota Corolla made between 1989 through 1997.
When I think back at what Subaru was doing when it was busy trying to sell boring Camcords and Corovics, was focusing on presenting to buyers a solid well designed interior that had comfort and space. The cars of that era presented to Japanese car buyers an alternative that was as good as any other. Subaru needed this era to demonstrate to conservative Japanese car buyers that they can do plain, boring and dull too.
After establishing this, they presented what made them different, but did it within the lessons they learned.
I don’t believe they erred during this time. I believe they have had the growth success since the mid-1990s, due to it.
Remember the first Subarus? Yuk. Rusty narrow buckets with flat out goofy styling quirks and interior nonsense. Ugly instrument panels, plaid interiors, no shoulder room, orange day-glo instrumentation, irritating chime alarms. The only thing that saved them was their excellent quality. They were seriously overpriced. Popular in Colorado and Vermont. They were niche players for a real reason. That boxer engine was completely cool in a way Mazda only wished they could have been with their Wankel. The first generation wore out its welcome by 1988.
So – Subaru really needed to up its game within the US market and they did this. It was a good move.
“Remember the first Subarus?”
Yep. 2-cylinder, 2-stroke 360cc engine, 10″ wheels, rear-engine/rear-drive, brought to the U.S. courtesy of “Uncle” Malcolm Bricklin. It was like a go-kart you could drive on the street. (At least if you didn’t mind taking your life in your hands.) Made a VW bug look like a stretch limo in comparison.
A college friend had, at various times from the late 90’s to the mid 00’s, three different hand-me-down Subaru wagons–two DL/GL (Loyale) and a FWD Legacy. Sure, the Legacy was less quirky, but they were just so night and day different in terms of ride, comfort, and especially quality. The Loyales felt like they were made out of tinfoil–tougher than they looked/felt, but they felt rather insubstantial. The Legacy felt like a Cadillac by comparison, with much greater comfort and, as noted in the article, very high quality interior materials. I never drove the Legacy so I can’t compare, but my friend said it drove far better as well.
At the same time, his parents had a loaded AWD wagon from the end of this first Legacy generation. Leather, sunroof, the works. And that one was a *really* nice car.
For a lengthy but good read on the subject, there was a book written called “Where the suckers moon”. The first half is on the rather interesting history of Subaru (I mean, it involves Malcom Bricklin, how can it not be interesting?), the second half is about an ad campaign that they did when they were trying to move into being a mainstream car company.
These 1st gen Legacys always struck me as a slightly more mainstream looking, Japanese-built, Mercury Sable. And I mean that as a compliment.
I have seen 1 or 2 of these pop-up on Craigslist the last 2 years, but almost always FWD and automatic transmission.
3 of my 4 sisters have Outbacks (and no, all are hetero), with 1 on her second and another on her 3.
To me, the newer Legacy sedans look incredibly boring….more so than the current Accord and Camry.
A company I worked for in the late 80s/early 90s had one of these and it was open for employees to use on company business around town. I drove it a handful of times … and never enjoyed the experience. It’s been a long time, but my memory is that the steering was rubbery and the seat was uncomfortable. This conflicts with the experience reports of at least one commenter above, though!
I remember going car shopping with my dad the year the legacy came out. We had an older Subaru, in fact I learned to drive a stick shift ( and burn out a clutch) on it.
He has horrified by the price. I think it was 25k?
The 1990 Legacy LS AWD wagon (which came with alloy wheels, moonroof, etc.) was a little over $17K MSRP. My dad bought one new – traded his ’86 4WD GL-10 wagon for it – and got the extra-cost air suspension, which was able to raise and lower the whole car; even with that and other options, I think the price still remained below $20K. It was a great wagon except when an air shock had to be replaced, about $500 each time (this was when the car was >10 years old); I can see why Subaru dropped the option.
A former coworker had one of this generation. I rode in it a few times. It was nice and had a sunroof. It did have an electrical problem that illuminated the door ajar indicator for one of the doors even though it was not ajar. Still, she said it was the best car she ever owned.
Probably just a $10 door jamb switch. It takes 5 mins to install.
I remember when the Subaru Legacy was introduced to the North American (USA) market. While I liked the compact car (Leone, Loyale, etc.), I knew Subaru needed something to compete against the likes of the Toyota Camry, the Honda Accord. 25 years after this first generation Legacy debuted, I still like this version. I believe they did it right the first time. Nearly everything after that just looks hideous.
For a while, there were unsold Legacys from the IN plant, parked in surface lots, including one in Kenosha WI. This was around 91-92 and don’t know how they got rid of them.
The Outback series was a hit and no more unsold lots, since.
The last side profile picture of the Legacy has a pleasing cohesive profile and looks good in general. If I was in the market back in the 90s I’d seriously consider researching the Legacy if I came across it.
I have a 2007 LGT wagon and no one I talk to ever seems to realize it is AWD. I’m frequently asked if it’s FWD. Sometimes I wonder if Subaru has wasted a fortune on advertising.
Subaru was more of a niche player in New Zealand until the Legacy came along to catch folks’ attention. Becoming AWD-only really cemented the company’s rise here – mid-size RWD station wagons (Ford Sierra, Toyota Corona, Mitsi Sigma, etc) were extremely popular with NZ’s family market throughout the 1980s, but by 1989 only the Sierra was still RWD. Families wanting a mid-size wagon that could tow a caravan or boat without wheel-spinning found the AWD Legacy wagon just what they were looking for. My parents are typical examples: after 8 Fords over 25+ years, they bought a 1989 Legacy GT turbo wagon in 1996, and never looked back. They’re now on their third Outback wagon because Subaru alone offers the mid-size towing-capable vehicle they and many other Kiwis want. And it all started with that 1989 Legacy. Hardly any early Legacys left nowadays of course – they never rusted, just succumbed to boy racers eager to hurl bodykits and fake hood scoops (for the non-turbo models) at them…
A prime example of how far the Japanese were willing to take their products up-market prior to the bubble economy collapse. The Legacy was a huge leap forward from the Loyale series at the time. I personally hate the sedan’s window lines, and wish we here in the US got the tall-roofed wagon models, but that does not diminish the fact that these were very modern, competent cars in their era.
I remember a co-worker bought a fwd version of one of these and I bought its predecessor, an 83 charger off him.
even tho the charger blew up the first week I had it I still think I got the better car.
horrid little beast!
why was it worse than your “Charger” K-Car?
Good article and my dad had a 1993 Legacy Estate which I really liked though it was a bit cramped for my six foot frame especially when shifting gears. Sometimes I wonder if Subaru should have tried building a Minivan.
Excellent point – two phylum I think Subaru is severely missing is a small, roomy AWD pick-up based on the Impreza/Forrester platform, and a AWD midi-van bigger than the Mazda5. I’m disappointed they haven’t done more with hybrids as well.
After 60k miles I’m still in love with my Outback. 27 mpg and sure-footedness in the rain with plenty of room for all my flotsam. I only wished the seat-bottoms had another inch or two for leg support, and the sunroof was extended like on the Forrester.
I had a 93 Legacy wagon auto 1800 ohc and AWD it sucked a lot of gas for very little performance with the Kiwi spec 1800 carb engine but it was a comfortable car to ride in and reasonably well finished, I got it from a BIL who had it since it was 18 months old he had the transmission rebuilt just out of warranty and had it maintained by a local garage who plainly didnt know what they were doing, After I rectified some of their mistakes to the carby the car ran quite well and started easily something it hadnt done for sometime, it had 350,000kms racked up yet used no oil a good car in my book.
While I have always applauded Subaru for offering all their cars in AWD guise, It boggles my mind that they went to full time AWD after 1999 so the car is always in 4WD. Prior to that, there was a button that you pushed to put it in 4wd or 2wd. Despite the BS that car companies put out about needing 4WD all the time, you don’t need 4WD or AWD all the time. I don’t see why you would need it on a dry road on a sunny 60 degree day.
In Subaru’s AWD system with an automatic, the torque split is 90/20 front/rear, unless the rear wheels start spinning.
With a manual, it’s 50/50, and that can be changed to from 90/10 to 10/90, as needed.
The truth is, there’s no big deal about having AWD on all the time. What difference does it make? Full-time AWD systems have been very common since the early 70s.
hi colin;
the reason I said I preferred the Charger over the Subaru at the time had nothing to do with reliability. as said, the charger blew up almost immediately. but the charger at least felt like a car. like most of us here I like a vehicle that provokes some sort of reaction when I get into it. that subie felt like I was riding in a toaster. it just felt “bleh”
I’ve been in later model subarus that felt better but all I remember about riding in that car was basically nothing.
I had a dodge caravan years later that kind of gave me the same reaction. super reliable, (200,000km in 5 years, no issues), was comfortable, but no personality what so ever.
that is to me what makes cars interesting tho. one man’s “bleh” is another man’s “rocketship”!
Frameless side glass was an interesting design feature, don’t forget. They ran forever and held up well. Differentiation was brilliant but it took a few years to catch on due to concerns about reliability. Remember offshore vehicles were known to be expensive to fix.