Say Goodbye To The Subaru Outback 3.6R; Why Customers Won’t Miss It

I own a 3.6R, and this engine is a marvel of smoothness and quiet, capable performance. Having driven the 2.4T in the Ascent, I can say that this engine still has the harsh, signature boxer engine sound. Secondarily, when you summon up the power of the turbo 4, your gas mileage will not be good. Thirdly, the turbo 4 gets no better than the mpg of the 3.6R because the turbo 4 has to work harder than a 6 at all times Lastly, the turbo 4 is considerably cheaper to manufacture than the flat six.

I have only owned 6 cylinder Outback’s since 2001, 2007 and now my 2012. They are quite, reliable have the extra power on tap when needed. I would guess that the new turbo 4 pot will not match the quietness or smoothness of the 6 cylinder.

My 2018 Outback is the first car I have owned that the frame is not pre punched for a trailer hitch. The Subaru line markets to the outdoor enthusiast yet the trailering set up is weak. I tow a 750 lb kayak trailer with an 800 lb. load. I had to drill the frame and practically disassemble the rear of the car to install a wiring harness.

Not from Missouri, but you'll have to show me. For 13 years I drove a '05 Honda Pilot which was a great car but the best mileage I could get on the Interstates out of the 245 HP V-6 was 22 MPG. Bought a '18 3.6, 256 HP Outback, drove it from the W. Coast to Houston and back, 80 MPH on the TX, NM, AZ, CA Interstates and got 26, one tank 25 MPG, 20 around town. Smooth as silk, What's not to like?

I have owned two 3.6's and an XT the six is much smoother, but the turbos of course are faster. Both have their places it is sad that Subaru has terminated the XT line of Forester. The 3.6 is a wonderful engine and arguing that you get better fuel economy with the turbo is flawed logic.

they have bigger design issues. Like having to change a head light through the wheel well. Also the plastic bumper should not reach half way up the head lights. On a vehicle you market as a SUV. I hit a Raccoon and it is $1500 to fix. because half the bumper needs paint matched.

The 3.6R is a beautiful engine in every respect, which is why it has been around for so long. I love the subdued, low rumble as I drive through the neighborhood in the morning at an idle. I love being able to merge onto the highway going uphill at 70 MPH and not needing to break 2,000 RPM.

My wife's Forester XT (which I drive frequently) makes a heck of a racket and provides a strange, sporadic acceleration profile doing the same highway merge -- whether trying to be gentle or aggressive. I think that's why the XT going away isn't that big a deal. I'll gladly purchase the electrified performance version, which hopefully will make it's way to the US shores before the lease is up. I'm tired of cleaning the constant coating of black soot from all over the back of her XT and who knows what the intake valves look like or what damage is being done by low-speed pre-ignition (LSPI). I also won't miss choking on the exhaust gasses in the morning from the overly rich, unburnt fuel as the car warms up and I'm cleaning off the windows.

Conversely, my Outback with the 3.6R has the exhaust smell of a beautifully tuned muscle car (if you remember what those were and got to build and play with them as I did), and with the changes made to the 2018 Outback, the low speed drivability (over my 2016 that went like a bat out of hell no matter how you drove it) is much, much better (though they really screwed up the suspension, but adding a 19mm rear swaybar and $1,000 worth of decent tires helps a whole lot). Having had a few high performance cars that would generally get around 10-15 MPG, I am still amazed that I can drive in a fairly aggressive manner at 70-80 MPH and still get over 20 MPG.

So to say customers won't miss the 3.6R is a misnomer. The performance option is there with the 2.4, and from the few times I've driven an Ascent the acceleration profile and drivability will be much better than that provided by the Forester XT (if you want to make that comparison). New buyers won't know the difference, but those that WILL miss the 3.6R will be the previous owners that won't have a similar option in a new Outback, years from now -- but by that time an electrified version that outperforms the 2.4 will probably be the performance option and we'll be having a whole new ICE versus PHEV versus BEV versus FCEV versus [maybe something new] argument.

New Outback comes on a new platform which is supposedly much better. The 2020 Legacy is also a lot quieter than older versions and that should should also carry over to the Outback

My family and I have owned 9 Subaru automobiles beginning in 1996. All driven over 100,000+ miles. All receiving scheduled maintenance and oil changes every 3500 miles. Five 2.5 NA engines; two 2.5 XT; one 3.0 H-6 and one 3.6 H-6. With out question, the 3.6 has been the superior engine and the one with the least amount of trouble. In addition, anyone who has driven the 2.5 vs 3.6 Outback will tell you of the superior driving characteristics of the 3.6 on the highway/freeway. The additional weight in the front "plants" the car to the road. Very minimal sway in crosswinds. The 2.4 Turbo will probably as fast as the 3.6, but Subaru will have to do their homework to match the driving dynamics of the 3.6 in the Outback.

Thinking back to why I bought my first 2001 Outback , I wanted the VDC feature.
It was only available with the H6 engine back then. I also learned the engine had a timing chain and not the rubber timing belt used on the 4 pot.
As an engineer, I also knew the H6's timing chain was a more reliable design, so paying extra for the H6 was worth it to me.
Like me and as other H6 owners have noted, the H6 is quieter, reliable, quicker and still achieves decent mileage.
Last year, Consumers Report also ranked the 3.6R Outback a couple of points higher/better than the 4 pot due to improved performance.
I hope Subaru has a change of heart and keeps the 3.6R as an optional power plant going into the future.

I'm a little concerned about the switch subaru is going with. First, the 3.6r really is not that bad on gas( I get 24-28mpg in my 2011 legacy regularly).
2) all the extra piping for a turbo adds weight and more complication to an engine.
3) the 3.6r is on luxury car level smoothness where as the H4 engines are loud and not so smooth.
4) turbo + cvt + larger sized sedans and crossovers and a 3000lb tow rating sounds like a reliability nightmare.
5) subaru has already had major issues with the FA series engines. Hundreds of thousands have had recalls for valve spring problems. The 3.6r has really only had the timing cover leak issue which is not that invasive.

So I'm all for keeping a smoother more reliable engine that is slightly more expensive than a smaller more complex cheapo one.

Having recently gone from a FA20DIT in a Wrx to a 3.6r Outback I can say the H6 is much smoother and has a much more refined feeling overall. I know an Outback is SUPPOSED to feel smoother than a Wrx going down the road, but there is something unique to the power delivery of this flat 6. You can tell there is a reason Subaru used the design for so long. I was disappointed that the ascent was only equipped with the 2.4 turbo and wasn’t offered with a 6. If I had my way I’d have Subaru revamp the 3.6R with forged internals, direct injection ect. Maybe bump the power up to around 300-330hp like gm’s V6? No turbo and extra intake/ exhaust plumbing needed. That would be a sweet ride, but i know it’s not really the brand’s m.o. to value performance over fuel economy. A guy can dream though.

We have a new Ascent (Touring model). The 2.4 Turbo has plenty of power but with only 500 miles on it, I haven't opened it up yet. The Ascent is a people hauler and, as such, I don't expect outstanding performance but so far I am pleased. My wife, however, prefers her 3.6R Limited 2015 Outback. She doesn't like the slight delay in acceleration when you press on the Ascent's gas pedal with a bit a vigor. We also had a 2011 Forester (until it sacrificed itself in a crash to save my wife). We both like the 6 cylinder much better than the 4 banger that was in the Forester. Smoother, quieter and still adequate power in the mountains.