Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





2011 Subaru Forester

135

Comments

  • xwesxxwesx Fairbanks, AlaskaPosts: 8,650
    Wow. If they offered that car here, I don't think I would hesitate much before buying (in a few years... not yet!). I'd probably even ditch my "I'll go with the fuel miser for my daily driver" philosophy. :blush:

    As with the boxy cargo area comment you stated above, I agree, and I appreciate the room the Forester provides for its size. It is an incredibly practical and versatile car, and I certainly wouldn't mind having another one or having one that is far superior in terms of fun-factor.

    I am still looking at the miserly compact segment for my Escort replacement at some point down the road, but who knows what will strike my fancy when the day comes? I can be impulsive (though still prudent) now and again.... :D
    2010 Subaru Forester, 2011 Ford Fiesta, 1969 Chevrolet C20 Pickup, 1969 Ford Econoline 100, 1976 Ford F250 Pickup, 1974 Ford Pinto Wagon
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Have you seen the new Elantra? 6 speed manual or auto plus 40mpg. You can even get heated rear seats (where did that come from?).

    Subaru has to hurry the FB20 engine, which is also rumored to get 40mpg, though probably in an Impreza or FT86 Toytobaru coupe.
  • xwesxxwesx Fairbanks, AlaskaPosts: 8,650
    Yeah, Hyundai is a fine car. I am tending to lean toward the Impreza again just because of the AWD, but I would take an economy hit. The Hyundai is basically lumped in with Fit and Fiesta as real possibilities.

    Right now, after 2.5 years and 35,000 miles on the Escort, my "lifetime" average (bought it at 108K and have 142K on it now) is 31.23 mpg. My worst month (December 2009) was 28.21 mpg. With a current-gen Impreza, I think my average would be closer to 26 mpg lifetime (the AWD takes a big hit during winter, even with synthetic fluids).
    2010 Subaru Forester, 2011 Ford Fiesta, 1969 Chevrolet C20 Pickup, 1969 Ford Econoline 100, 1976 Ford F250 Pickup, 1974 Ford Pinto Wagon
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    I would at least wait to see the new Impreza. They should offer a 160hp 2.0l model with the new FB20 engine, and some rumors call for the same 40mpg.

    I expect more like mid 30s.

    Plus - the concept looks gorgeous...
  • xwesxxwesx Fairbanks, AlaskaPosts: 8,650
    All very valid points!

    Barring any catastrophic failures, I have no plans to replace it within the next two years. Even then, if it is a minor catastrophic failure (like an engine), I'll probably just fix it. All things told, it is pretty cheap to own, easy to work on it, and reliable.
    2010 Subaru Forester, 2011 Ford Fiesta, 1969 Chevrolet C20 Pickup, 1969 Ford Econoline 100, 1976 Ford F250 Pickup, 1974 Ford Pinto Wagon
  • Check out the Honda CRV Cargo space is taller wider and longer.
    The hatch opng. is also wider and taller.
    Wheel base and length are almost the same but I think that the CRV
    has more usable space.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    My brother has one, and the funny thing is his wife has a Forester! So they have both!

    The CR-V's seats fold and tumble forward, so you actually end up with more cargo length in the Subie.

    Both offer good space and are space efficient.
  • rshollandrsholland Posts: 19,710
    There's much more cargo space in the CRV when the seats are tumble-folded. The load floor is much, much lower than that of the Forester—and that makes a huge difference.

    Bob
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    It's higher, so you may have to pile things up, though.

    Car & Driver measured and the sheet of plywood, i.e. the floor area, in the Forester was actually bigger.

    Let me search...BRB.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Found it:

    http://www.caranddriver.com/var/ezflow_site/storage/original/application/484f036- 98b354b558bc433d7f1964c72.pdf

    CR-V wins for Area: 73 cubic feet behind 1st row, 36 behind 2nd row.

    Forester has 63/31, though the huge moonroof actually hurts those numbers.

    Forester wins for cargo length and width: 70" x 42.3"

    CR-V offers 54" x 38".

    So indeed, the Forester is well over a foot longer, and more than 4" wider. The CR-V's height makes up for it and gives it the win in total volume, but like I said, you may have to stack...
  • rshollandrsholland Posts: 19,710
    I don't care what C&D says. The interior space in Mairen's CRV is far more than that in Deb's Forester, or a new Forester. I know. I've loaded both cars, and Marien's CRV can carry much more cargo than our Forester.

    Bob
  • rshollandrsholland Posts: 19,710
    edited February 2011
    I don't care how you want to define it, but the CRV has more "usable" space. It can handle large bulky (big-box) objects much easier than the Forester. It has an excellent height, width and length ratio. Big stuff just fits better, and it is just easier to load and unload. That low load floor makes a huge difference.

    I bet if I had to, I could put a washing machine in there. Well, maybe not me, but a couple of gorillas with good backs. :)

    Bob
  • Yes you could put a washing machine in the cargo area.
    The CRV also has a much bigger area in the back without having to lower the back seats.
    And the total overall exterior length is slightly shorter than the Forester.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    edited February 2011
    Her (Mairen's) CR-V is the previous generation, so I'm not sure how the cargo space compares to hers. That C&D tested the latest generation.

    The funny thing?

    I actually HAVE brought home a clothes washing machine inside a Forester, on its side, my 1998 as a matter of fact. I even took photos.

    Bob - you've seen them, though you probably do not remember.

    The CR-V's cargo area is taller so it would probably do the same thing, upright. But I doubt it would fit length-wise.

    Here's a good video:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_4SN9tXvrRQ

    FFWD to 6:18.

    Of course the test is rigged to show the advantage of the Forester, but you see how the width between the wheel wells matters.

    Again, the CR-V may fit that box standing up - is it 38.5" tall? Nope - I watched the video again, at around 7:10 you clearly see there is no chance, even upright, that would fit.

    We should measure lift over, but I don't doubt the CR-V's is a little lower.

    The Forester's cargo area is designed around a box.

    Competitors may have nooks and crannies, areas carved out, and taller roofs, which give them more volume that you may or may not be able to use, depends on what you're carrying.

    Edit: Bob - remember that Deb has the old suspension in her Forester. The 09 and later got the less intrusive rear suspension that really opened up cargo width, and makes a big difference. The humps on the sides are much smaller now.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    edited February 2011
    Don't shoot the messenger...

    http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars/new-cars/cr-recommended/best-in-cargo-ca- - pacity-fuel-economy-1205-fuel-economy-cargo-haul/index.htm

    Area for the biggest cargo box that fits in with the door closed:

    Forester: 35.5 cubic feet
    CR-V: 25.5 cubic feet

    Element is amazing, though, since the interior is basically the shape of a box - 47 cubes! Wow! Nearly double the CR-V.

    Forester beats a couple of mid-sizers, even, the RX and Equinox, and it ties the Jeep Grand Cherokee.

    I realize this is just one yardstick, and most people go with what the EPA says, but it really depends on what you haul home.

    I'm thinking about a generator, for example. If it's in one large box, odds are better it will fit in a Forester vs. a CR-V.

    If you go to Costco and buy a lot of little stuff you can pile up, the CR-V can fit more.

    Bob: let's make a bet. If I do buy one, I'll save the box. We'll see which one it fits in better, or maybe at least measure since the Honda is on the eastern shore.
  • nyccarguynyccarguy Stamford, CTPosts: 7,903
    Some of those YouTube Videos are pretty enlightening. Not every AWD system is created equal.

    2001 Prelude Type SH, 2011 Pilot EX-L 4WD, 2015 Subaru Legacy 2.5i Premium

  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    True.

    Note that Subaru (every manufacturer, really) performs tests that lay toward the strengths of that particular car.

    So they show the Forester on a front/rear only ramp, but the Legacy and Tribeca on a single-wheel-has-traction ramp.

    Reading between the lines - the Forester could not do what the VTD system does in the Legacy/Outback/Tribeca.
  • godeacsgodeacs Posts: 481
    Sorry, not buying what you're selling! What do you do - stack to the ceiling??? No way a CR-V has more cargo space than than a Forester. Heck, when you fold the rear seats of the CR-V down/forward you are losing almost 18" of depth...front to back....... :confuse:

    Looked at both the other night and it was quite obvious which holds more, front to back......not the CR-V!

    PS You are comparing a 2011 CR-V to a 2011 Forester, right????
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    No, his daughter has the previous-gen CR-V.
  • rshollandrsholland Posts: 19,710
    Nope, comparing a 2004 CRV with a 2001 Forester. Yeah, I know the new Forester is larger—but it's not that much larger. Don't know about the current CRV, but I would assume it to be about the same as the '04.

    And, yes, packed to the ceiling. Did that several times while moving my daughter out of various apartments. Also packed the Forester to the ceiling at the same time. The CRV wins hands down.

    Bob
  • Leave the back seats up on both cars now measure the cargo area width
    height and depth you will see that the CRV is much bigger.
    Now lower the passenger side front and back seat and stick a 2x4x8' lengthwise in the cargo area and shut the hatch you will notice that there is much more room in the CRV.
    Any way you slice it the CRV has much more usable room.

    I'm comparing the latest generation CRV 2007and up, to the 2011 Forester.
    I have one of each.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    You can fit that same lumber in the Forester by sliding the passenger seat forward and reclining it back all the way.

    There's room to spare, I once measured when the Outlander guys said the Forester could not do it. I was happy to prove them wrong.
  • slices17slices17 Posts: 35
    Hi,

    We just bought a 2011 Subaru Forester with the 4-speed automatic transmission about 3 weeks ago. We notice that as soon as we start the engine (with the transmission in P), the sport mode indicator on the dash comes on. And it stays on no matter which gear we are in.

    Is that right? I thought the sport mode indicator is supposed to come on only when I shift to D and then pull the stick to the left (so that it's left of the D, below the + and above the -).

    Does anyone else observe the same in their Forester?

    Thanks in advance.

    Ray
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    I believe you are correct, the light is malfunctioning...
  • prigglypriggly Posts: 642
    The "Sport" green light should only be on with the gear shift lever to the left. Defective. Take it to the dealer.
  • saedavesaedave Chicago, ILPosts: 685
    The "Sport" green light should only be on with the gear shift lever to the left. Defective.

    But make sure the lever is NOT to the left first! :blush:
  • We rented a '10 Forester last year and loved it overall with one BIG issue: For some bizarro reason the passenger seat is set an inch or two lower than the driver's. My wife and I both found this very odd and offputting. Hard to figure why on earth they would design it this way.

    Now we're on the market and I'm wondering if the '11s have this as well and if anyone knows if it will be fixed in a '12 redesign. I see a number of other comments on the internet about this, so I don't think it's just us....thanks
  • xwesxxwesx Fairbanks, AlaskaPosts: 8,650
    The passenger seat is set at a fixed height, while the driver seat can be adjusted up or down. Because of that, yes, the passenger seat is often lower than the driver seat. Since it is not a "problem," it is hard to say whether it will be "fixed" in future years, but having a passenger seat that also has a height adjustment would be a nice feature!
    2010 Subaru Forester, 2011 Ford Fiesta, 1969 Chevrolet C20 Pickup, 1969 Ford Econoline 100, 1976 Ford F250 Pickup, 1974 Ford Pinto Wagon
  • Thanx but I don't remember being able to get them level no matter what the driver's adjustment. At best you'd have to put driver's seat in max low position. A buddy of mine has a '10 and says this bugs him too, so I don't think I'm crazy. Baffled at why they would design it this way. If they fix -- er, redesign -- in '12, the Forester would be at top of my list.
  • xwesxxwesx Fairbanks, AlaskaPosts: 8,650
    Hmmm, you may be right about that. It does sit quite a bit lower than the driver seat in our car, but I prefer an upright position so ours is set fairly high; it makes the ride much more comfortable for long trips, which are not infrequent occurrences.
    2010 Subaru Forester, 2011 Ford Fiesta, 1969 Chevrolet C20 Pickup, 1969 Ford Econoline 100, 1976 Ford F250 Pickup, 1974 Ford Pinto Wagon
Sign In or Register to comment.