Why no Trailseeker/R2 comparisons?

[Thebandit]

I agree the Rivian is better which is why I'm getting one. But the Trailseeker has a lot of advantages for some people: way more physical buttons, more traditional key/entry/access setup, a much much larger network of service centers, a brand that has actually been around for a while and doesn't have the "operating at a loss, betting the company on this car" startup feel, traditional physical door handles. It's a much more "normal car that happens to be electric" than the R2. Cheaper. Actually available for purchase today.

Oh......... and a real radio

Sponsored

 

[smashweights]

Comparisons will come. I, for one, wouldn't consider the current crop of Subarus nor an EV from them.

We have owned a 2009 Subaru Legacy and a 2016 Subaru Forester and while they were good cars, Subaru has tended to live off their outdoorsy and reliable reputation. Design, interior quality, etc have always been pretty mid as a result. I never had any complaints about ours but there wasn't really anything impressive. Their software and infotainment in both vehicles was crummy too. They've always been adequate in most regards without impressing. My father in laws 2022 Outback is better on the software front but the current gen Subie designs are just awful looking.

I also don't trust OEMs that are just dabbling in EVs to see what market demand is. After considering the Lightning just to watch Ford abandon it the risk of an an established OEM ditching support for an EV model is just as real as Rivian not being viable long term.

 

[JeffnReno]

Does anyone really need many of the things we want? Will I ever use any of the trail capabilities of anything being offered by any brand that has them? No to both questions, but it doesn't stop me from wanting them. The R2 will be our 4th BEV (if/when we ever get the invite) and I look at it as a Swiss army knife of BEVs. Can do everything we use our current Model Y for and then some. Maybe if Tesla hadn't took away lane keep without requiring a $99 a month FSD subscription on the new Ys just to have that, we would just be staying in the Y camp since it tows our popup camper just fine, even though I had to install the electric brake controller myself. The R2 tows even more and the controller is part of the software. The R2 checks all the boxes with range, charging, drive feel and comfort, and is actually cheaper than our current '23 Model Y. We'll give Rivian a chance to replace the Y and if it doesn't work out I'm sure Tesla will still be around. I don't need 656 hp or 0-60 in 3.6 seconds. Hell, I keep our Y in Chill mode to keep my wife from complaining plus my old neck doesn't appreciate the neck snapping acceleration most EV offer. But the Semi-Active Suspension among many other things makes me desire the R2 now.

 

[ENVErider]

There are a lot of R2/Model Y comparisons but they seem like two very different vehicles to me. One is an SUV that can off-road and the other is a slightly upsized Model 3 (sedan). Other comparisons here are also with non-offroad capable EVs (BMW, Mach-E, and Ferrari for some reason...).
In fact, it seems to me that the Trailseeker is really the only other off-roadable vehicle around that price point. So while the videos of the R2 are showing it climbing dirt roads and wading through shallow creeks, the only other EV doing that is the Trailseeker and nobody seems to be thinking of comparing the two.

I understand that a lot of people will probably chime in and say something along the lines of "most people won't take these vehicles off-road anyway, so what does it matter?", but if that were the point then the manufacturers wouldn't try to make them capable off-road. They'd just make another Tesla clone. Manufacturers make off-road capable vehicles for people who want to leave the streets. So those vehicles should be compared with each other appropriately.

I'm going to test drive the Trailseeker later today, and I'll try to report back as much as I can. I already test drove the R2, but was disappointed in how little I was allowed to do in the very short time allotted to me in the test drive. The big thing that sucks about test drives for these off-road vehicles is that we can't take them off-road!

Thoughts?

I share your disappointment in that the majority of reviewers use the MY as their baseline comparison vehicle, but I do understand their choice. The challenge for any reviewer is that there is no equal to the R2; maybe the scout will be closer if it ever releases. For reviewers, you first need to decide if you're comparing off-road vehicles that have electric drivetrains, or if you are reviewing EVs that have OTA updates and class-leading tech; the R2 arguably is unique in fitting into both. I think the OTA updates and software based architecture is why reviewers keep choosing the MY as the comparison.
I LOVE the Subaru brand and their decades-long focus on outdoor adventures, but I kinda agree with @NY_Rob in that the Trailblazer is not particularly comparable in either. Yes, ground clearance is only 1-2" less, but the R2 comes with quite a bit more tire on it; 32" to 29" OD and 255 to 235 tire width. On the software side, the Subaru is nowhere near close. I have not heard anyone talking about Subaru's advancements in autonomy, software focus, and OTA updates.
Again, I love the Subaru brand. As someone who doesn't care much about autonomy, and since I read you are prioritizing off-road capabilities, I think you should definitely test-drive it. I do agree that it's the second-best choice for off-roading in this category, but I guess I don't think it's a close second overall.

 

[Great Gatsby]

I agree the Rivian is better which is why I'm getting one. But the Trailseeker has a lot of advantages for some people: way more physical buttons, more traditional key/entry/access setup, a much much larger network of service centers, a brand that has actually been around for a while and doesn't have the "operating at a loss, betting the company on this car" startup feel, traditional physical door handles. It's a much more "normal car that happens to be electric" than the R2. Cheaper. Actually available for purchase today.

Oh......... and a real radio

This is why Subaru did the Trailseeker the way they did - familiarity. They fear ICE buyers won't accept an EV unless it imitates its ICE siblings. While I get the desire for the things you mentioned, it does not necessarily make for the better experience. There is some weird pushback on the modernization of the auto industry now to remain analogue when the rest of the world is moving digital. We go our lives from screen to screen. I don't think lack of buttons is the issue but rather how overkill screens can become and how thoughtless their implementation can be. IMO Rivian strikes a solid balance of screens and buttons. I drive a 2018 BMW and my wife drives a 2026 Model Y. I enjoy both, but using them back to back, the BMW is closer to something from the 80s than where Tesla is today. Cars need to get with the times. The startups get that. The traditional manufactoeers would much prefer to keep things where they are. Also, in my experience, once you go PAAK, it is hard to go back.

I will concede a bigger service network and it being establish brand "helps", in as much as one I expect Subaru to actually support their EVs. Plenty of stories to be found of dealerships having no idea how to fix the EVs they sell or being relegated to a "specialist". Oh, and as smashweights mentioned, just like the Lightning, Subaru can discontinue and abandon the Trailseeker at any second. Rivian does not have that luxury with the R2. I'd put my bet on Rivian in this case. Oh, and FWWI, Rivian has a higher market cap so I wouldn't put the whole "Rivian may disappear at any day with their losses" in the cons section. They will be fine.

I do wish the R2 had regular door handles but whatever. Rivian has their mind made up here so that is the one win I can give the Trailseeker. I do hope the Trailseeker does well even though it does not appear that Subaru in the U.S. wants it to.

 

[RickS WA]

I did compare the R2 and the Trailseeker. Note that I currently have two Subaru's under my carport and they are the 5th and 6th Subaru's we have owned. Also, the dealer has been great. For me, it came down to two things. 1. The R2 has ~50 miles more range. 2. The Trailseeker is basically a Subaru branded Toyota Woodland and has not been sized for tall people as most Subaru's since 2010 have been. I'm 6'-2". I literally do not fit comfortably in a Trailseeker. With the seat all the way down and the steering wheel all the way up, I could barely get my fist between my legs and the bottom of the steering wheel. End of test drive without even moving the vehicle.

 

[Thebandit]

I did compare the R2 and the Trailseeker. Note that I currently have two Subaru's under my carport and they are the 5th and 6th Subaru's we have owned. Also, the dealer has been great. For me, it came down to two things. 1. The R2 has ~50 miles more range. 2. The Trailseeker is basically a Subaru branded Toyota Woodland and has not been sized for tall people as most Subaru's since 2010 have been. I'm 6'-2". I literally do not fit comfortably in a Trailseeker. With the seat all the way down and the steering wheel all the way up, I could barely get my fist between my legs and the bottom of the steering wheel. End of test drive without even moving the vehicle.

Pretty similar, except I was looking at the Uncharted and Solterra instead of the Trailseeker due to size. I've owned nothing but Subarus for over 12 years, and I've got a Crosstrek Wilderness and Ascent in the garage right now. I'm not tall but the ergonomics are not what I'm used to from Subaru. Didn't feel like a Subaru. The tech is fine but not good enough for me. I am very impatient and decided to wait for the R2.

Subaru is really missing an opportunity for a good outdoor enthusiast, young, tech savvy buyer. The R2 is going to be huge with that segment.

 

[Yamazaki]

Well, I got to do the Trailseeker test drive and there were some big surprises and some other interesting items that I'll share as well. I know it's long, but I hope that people wanting detail will appreciate it.

First off, I fully expected the wife to prefer the Trailseeker and I figured I would think the same as I did of the Solterra (not great... to be polite). It ended up being the opposite. The wife prefers the R2 (despite not being able to reach/fit with a bunch of stuff) and the Trailseeker was FAR better than I expected (granted, my expectations were pretty low to begin with).

First the "pleasant surprises"
- As expected, the wife fit perfectly in the Trailseeker. The seat, steering column, mirrors, etc all were fine for her. Despite that, on the way home she said "I'll just get a back pillow for the seat in the R2".
-The interface for everything isn't as bad as I was expecting. Conversely, my expectation for customization in the R2 was apparently too high. I would ask the Rivian minder who was with us "Can I move this screen over here? Can I change this to this?" and the response was always "no, it doesn't work like that". Maybe the Subaru benefited from the lowered expectations and the R2 was hurt by the pre-hype, but that is just something that stood out to me between the two. The R2 has more that can be done with its interface than the Trailseeker, but I expected still even more from it.
- I found the adjustments to be much easier in the Trailseeker than the R2. I mean, it was all basically the same as our Forester, so it was as we've been doing things for years. Knobs, buttons, etc were very natural.
- The rear hatch height is programable (and very easy to do too), so again - short people friendly, unlike the R2. I guess the wife will just have to carry a stick around to close the rear hatch on the R2, and we can't open it in our garage.
- The salesperson let me go off-road! He knew a place that they take people when test driving their Wilderness models, so we went there. It was much better than I expected. The suspension is MUCH better than the tired suspension in our Forester, so there wasn't as much getting tossed around as we are used to. The trail cameras were a nice touch, but they turned off if you went over 7 mi/hr and you couldn't change that. I only hit the underside once, but that's because I had started to get over confident due to the suspension soaking up some of the roughness of the terrain. The salesperson wanted to show off the X-Mode, but the terrain he selected for that was laughable and not a test of the system at all. Still, I know what X-Mode can do and how good it is. R2 doesn't have anything like that at the moment. (side note, I'm surprised that the Outback Wilderness does not have X-Mode)
- The A/C was fantastic. It was capable of doing a setting I call "arctic blast" and wasn't very noisy. By contrast, the R2 we tested was fairly noisy and didn't keep the vehicle as cold. I don't know why, but my 2004 Forester has amazing A/C and the 2017 Forester A/C is pretty weak.... The Trailseeker was just like the '04 and the R2 is better than the '17, but not as good as the Trailseeker or '04 Forester. Outside of the Phoenix area, Las Vegas is one of the hottest desert areas in the country, so A/C is important to me. Conversely, I couldn't care less about heated seats or steering wheels...
- We only got to drive the Limited model and it's the Touring that has ventilated seats and panoramic window roof, so those couldn't be tested against the R2. I remember how much I liked the ventilated seats in the R2, but honestly - the A/C in the Trailseeker means ventilated seats aren't needed. It's really that good.
- I wasn't as turned off by the styling of the Trailseeker. I managed to keep my food down. It's still not the prettiest vehicle out there (I like the box styling of the '04 Forester and Rivian R2), but this falls under "pleasant surprise" because I wouldn't hate myself if I had to see it every day in my garage.

The down sides
- We did the "self parking" feature. It's cute, but a bit of a gimmick. If you can't already park in the areas it'll park for you, then you probably shouldn't be driving anyway. The birds-eye view is similar to the R2, as are the guiding lines when moving around in a parking situation. That's a good thing, because the visibility isn't as good as the R2. In the R2, you know where all the corners of your vehicle are even without cameras. In the Trailseeker, it feels a little uncertain where all the corners of the vehicle are and are forced to rely on the cameras.
- The salesman tried to tout the Trailseeker's "power" on the freeway..... that was a mistake, because it doesn't have a lot. Sure it's better than whatever Subaru has to offer now, but it's weaker than their previous STI models and considerably weaker than the R2. It's not even a comparison. I know on paper there's only one second difference 0-60, but it feels like more. I know the R2 can outrun my '04 Forester... the Trailseeker cannot.
- I think on paper the cargo dimensions between the R2 and Trailseeker are similar... but it sure doesn't feel that way. The R2 has cavernous space while the Trailseeker feels more cramped. To add to that, no frunk on the Trailseeker (but there is easy-to-access battery and fluids) and the rear under-cargo area is less than even on our 2017 Forester. We recently hauled 4 people and all related camping items to Bryce Canyon recently in the 2017 Forester, and I'm not entirely convinced the Trailseeker could do the same. The R2 would have room left over.
-The adaptive cruise/lanekeeping/eyesight etc system was competent. It is basically self driving for freeways only (as long as you don't change lanes). It complained if I took my hands off the wheel or even looked somewhere else. The sensors are a little too sensitive when pulling onto the street from a parking lot. It would tell me a car is coming, but the car would be way far away still. The wife likes nanny-systems. I very much do not. The Subaru was trying to "keep me safe", but wasn't able to really drive itself. I wanted to tell the Trailseeker "If you can't do it, then don't try to tell me how to".
-Obviously the range and charging speed are negatives compared to the R2. We didn't get to test them, but we didn't get to test the R2 either. These are just already known variables.

Other notes-
They only had a white Trailseeker in Limited trim. I told them I would only be interested in the Sapphire color if I were to buy one. He said here in Las Vegas, they sell mostly white and silver vehicles. Some gray. But they don't order many of other colors because they don't sell well and they don't want vehicles sitting on the lot. If I were to order a Sapphire Trailseeker in Touring trim, I'd have to wait 3-4 months. Ha! I'd expect to get an R2 before that.... so much for the Trailseeker being "available now".

All-in-all, it was a very good trip. The wife is now all-in on the R2, and she's glad that she won't have regrets despite still being too small for the R2. Her reasoning was "it felt the same as our Forester. If we wanted that, we would just stick with the Forester and not get a new car. The R2 feels like a new car, so it's worth buying it". I'm not sure if I agree with the logic of that, (A Hummer H3 would feel different from our Forester... but that doesn't mean better) but I'm glad that I won't have to deal with any grief for getting an R2.

Still.... I was expecting essentially the same car as the rather garbage Solterra I had for a couple days earlier this year, and I was very mistaken. I can definitely see a market for this car, particularly for people who already like Subaru. It drives and feels the same, but is an EV. We are still getting an R2, but I certainly wouldn't mock anyone for opting for the Trailseeker instead. Particularly at that price.

I still think people who buy a Solterra need to get their head examined though...

 

[DuoRivian]

Well, I got to do the Trailseeker test drive and there were some big surprises and some other interesting items that I'll share as well. I know it's long, but I hope that people wanting detail will appreciate it.

First off, I fully expected the wife to prefer the Trailseeker and I figured I would think the same as I did of the Solterra (not great... to be polite). It ended up being the opposite. The wife prefers the R2 (despite not being able to reach/fit with a bunch of stuff) and the Trailseeker was FAR better than I expected (granted, my expectations were pretty low to begin with).

First the "pleasant surprises"
- As expected, the wife fit perfectly in the Trailseeker. The seat, steering column, mirrors, etc all were fine for her. Despite that, on the way home she said "I'll just get a back pillow for the seat in the R2".
-The interface for everything isn't as bad as I was expecting. Conversely, my expectation for customization in the R2 was apparently too high. I would ask the Rivian minder who was with us "Can I move this screen over here? Can I change this to this?" and the response was always "no, it doesn't work like that". Maybe the Subaru benefited from the lowered expectations and the R2 was hurt by the pre-hype, but that is just something that stood out to me between the two. The R2 has more that can be done with its interface than the Trailseeker, but I expected still even more from it.
- I found the adjustments to be much easier in the Trailseeker than the R2. I mean, it was all basically the same as our Forester, so it was as we've been doing things for years. Knobs, buttons, etc were very natural.
- The rear hatch height is programable (and very easy to do too), so again - short people friendly, unlike the R2. I guess the wife will just have to carry a stick around to close the rear hatch on the R2, and we can't open it in our garage.
- The salesperson let me go off-road! He knew a place that they take people when test driving their Wilderness models, so we went there. It was much better than I expected. The suspension is MUCH better than the tired suspension in our Forester, so there wasn't as much getting tossed around as we are used to. The trail cameras were a nice touch, but they turned off if you went over 7 mi/hr and you couldn't change that. I only hit the underside once, but that's because I had started to get over confident due to the suspension soaking up some of the roughness of the terrain. The salesperson wanted to show off the X-Mode, but the terrain he selected for that was laughable and not a test of the system at all. Still, I know what X-Mode can do and how good it is. R2 doesn't have anything like that at the moment. (side note, I'm surprised that the Outback Wilderness does not have X-Mode)
- The A/C was fantastic. It was capable of doing a setting I call "arctic blast" and wasn't very noisy. By contrast, the R2 we tested was fairly noisy and didn't keep the vehicle as cold. I don't know why, but my 2004 Forester has amazing A/C and the 2017 Forester A/C is pretty weak.... The Trailseeker was just like the '04 and the R2 is better than the '17, but not as good as the Trailseeker or '04 Forester. Outside of the Phoenix area, Las Vegas is one of the hottest desert areas in the country, so A/C is important to me. Conversely, I couldn't care less about heated seats or steering wheels...
- We only got to drive the Limited model and it's the Touring that has ventilated seats and panoramic window roof, so those couldn't be tested against the R2. I remember how much I liked the ventilated seats in the R2, but honestly - the A/C in the Trailseeker means ventilated seats aren't needed. It's really that good.
- I wasn't as turned off by the styling of the Trailseeker. I managed to keep my food down. It's still not the prettiest vehicle out there (I like the box styling of the '04 Forester and Rivian R2), but this falls under "pleasant surprise" because I wouldn't hate myself if I had to see it every day in my garage.

The down sides
- We did the "self parking" feature. It's cute, but a bit of a gimmick. If you can't already park in the areas it'll park for you, then you probably shouldn't be driving anyway. The birds-eye view is similar to the R2, as are the guiding lines when moving around in a parking situation. That's a good thing, because the visibility isn't as good as the R2. In the R2, you know where all the corners of your vehicle are even without cameras. In the Trailseeker, it feels a little uncertain where all the corners of the vehicle are and are forced to rely on the cameras.
- The salesman tried to tout the Trailseeker's "power" on the freeway..... that was a mistake, because it doesn't have a lot. Sure it's better than whatever Subaru has to offer now, but it's weaker than their previous STI models and considerably weaker than the R2. It's not even a comparison. I know on paper there's only one second difference 0-60, but it feels like more. I know the R2 can outrun my '04 Forester... the Trailseeker cannot.
- I think on paper the cargo dimensions between the R2 and Trailseeker are similar... but it sure doesn't feel that way. The R2 has cavernous space while the Trailseeker feels more cramped. To add to that, no frunk on the Trailseeker (but there is easy-to-access battery and fluids) and the rear under-cargo area is less than even on our 2017 Forester. We recently hauled 4 people and all related camping items to Bryce Canyon recently in the 2017 Forester, and I'm not entirely convinced the Trailseeker could do the same. The R2 would have room left over.
-The adaptive cruise/lanekeeping/eyesight etc system was competent. It is basically self driving for freeways only (as long as you don't change lanes). It complained if I took my hands off the wheel or even looked somewhere else. The sensors are a little too sensitive when pulling onto the street from a parking lot. It would tell me a car is coming, but the car would be way far away still. The wife likes nanny-systems. I very much do not. The Subaru was trying to "keep me safe", but wasn't able to really drive itself. I wanted to tell the Trailseeker "If you can't do it, then don't try to tell me how to".
-Obviously the range and charging speed are negatives compared to the R2. We didn't get to test them, but we didn't get to test the R2 either. These are just already known variables.

Other notes-
They only had a white Trailseeker in Limited trim. I told them I would only be interested in the Sapphire color if I were to buy one. He said here in Las Vegas, they sell mostly white and silver vehicles. Some gray. But they don't order many of other colors because they don't sell well and they don't want vehicles sitting on the lot. If I were to order a Sapphire Trailseeker in Touring trim, I'd have to wait 3-4 months. Ha! I'd expect to get an R2 before that.... so much for the Trailseeker being "available now".

All-in-all, it was a very good trip. The wife is now all-in on the R2, and she's glad that she won't have regrets despite still being too small for the R2. Her reasoning was "it felt the same as our Forester. If we wanted that, we would just stick with the Forester and not get a new car. The R2 feels like a new car, so it's worth buying it". I'm not sure if I agree with the logic of that, (A Hummer H3 would feel different from our Forester... but that doesn't mean better) but I'm glad that I won't have to deal with any grief for getting an R2.

Still.... I was expecting essentially the same car as the rather garbage Solterra I had for a couple days earlier this year, and I was very mistaken. I can definitely see a market for this car, particularly for people who already like Subaru. It drives and feels the same, but is an EV. We are still getting an R2, but I certainly wouldn't mock anyone for opting for the Trailseeker instead. Particularly at that price.

I still think people who buy a Solterra need to get their head examined though...

Thanks for the detailed summary. I have leased a base Premium which has standard blackout package and looks good in white. Price is a major factory when you can buy for $36k and leasing is subsidized.
One thing I don’t agree is with power- reviews state 4s bs the quoted 4.4s and it is fast.

Sponsored