Howdy, Stranger!

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





Forester Turbo in 1 year

1235716

Comments

  • ballisticballistic Posts: 1,687
    Ken,
    "Those questions regarding features that never make it to the US have been asked for a long time. Most of the reasons come down to cost. The US has one of the most price competitive auto markets in the world and Subaru isn't alone in "stripping down" USDM models."

    I'm not suggesting that Subaru ought to add more standard equipment. I'm suggesting that a lot of people would gladly pay a reasonable price for optional dual-range transfer, or optional self-leveling suspension, and so forth. Make features like these (which are available in other markets) available here, too, as extra-cost options. Everybody wins - buyers get what they want, nobody has to pay for something they don't want, and Subaru gets more revenue. What am I missing?
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Add factory HIDs and Navigation systems to your list of things cut out of US models. Well, the STi will have HIDs, but that'll be the first.

    -juice
  • kenskens Posts: 5,869
    ballistic,

    I completely understand what you're saying, but you're overlooking the operational cost to Subaru of America to offer and support these extra options.

    For every unique option any company offers for any product, there are administrative, production, inventory and support costs. For example, to add the self-leveling suspension, Subaru needs to set up: how to allow the dealer to order it, how the factory assembles it, documentation for both service and sales literature, train dealers on how to repair it and keep spare parts on hand.

    I know how these are all real costs because I deal with this sort of stuff on a daily basis. I'm a product manager (semiconductor test equipement) and I'm always fighting manufacturing and support to allow more options in our products. They want to minimize options to keep overhead low. I want to offer a plethora of options to keep the customer happy. Ultimately it's decided by what the market can bear.

    In the end, Subaru is also out to make a profit and the operational cost of increasing customer selectable options will be handed down to consumer (ie. prices go up).

    But I hear you completely -- I'd love to have the self leveling suspension, HIDs, headlight washers etc. I'd even be willing to pay a higher base price to make these options available, but I think we might be the minority for now. However, Subaru has been delivering more over the last few years so lets keep our fingers crossed.

    Ken
  • once_for_allonce_for_all Posts: 1,640
    You make some great points there and I fully agree. But what is up with Subaru sending over so many wagon models that compete with each other? That part doesn't make sense.

    John
  • kenskens Posts: 5,869
    John,

    Dunno. While I don't think there's rampant cannablism going on, I agree there is some cross-shopping that happens with Subarus.

    Forester<->OB Sport (and to some extent OB Wagon)
    Forester XT<->WRX Wagon (and to some extent GT Wagon)

    I think it has to do with the fact that Subaru is really a one-platform company.

    Ken
  • ballisticballistic Posts: 1,687
    A dealer has just notified me that the 2004 XT's base MSRP = $25,520, with invoice = $23,323.

    I don't yet know whether or not these include destination charges.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Hmm, some one in the Forester thread said $25,700. I'm happy though, I expected $26-28k.

    -juice
  • subearusubearu Posts: 3,613
    I was going to say the difference was destination charge, but that is only $525 I belive, more than the difference.

    Close enough though. Wonder what the XT premium's will run (mmmm, moonroof) ;-) .

    -Brian
  • lark6lark6 Posts: 2,565
    That's MSRP, not invoice. My '00 S had an MSRP of a shade over $25K (would have to go fetch the Monroney sticker to verify) pretty nearly loaded. There are a few things mine has that aren't standard on the XT but they are minor compared to a lot of what's now standard that was extra cost or not available in 2000 (besides the powerplant though that goes without saying).

    Again I'm sure there are people who will balk and say that's too much to pay for a Subaru, but those are people who just look at badges and not value for money.

    Sounds like a winner - now I just need to be patient...

    Ed
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Selling prices will be at least a grand lower within months, then 2 grand lower by the end of the year, is my guess. So long-term I'm looking at mid 23k range.

    That makes it a legit bargain. What else offers that kind of bang for the buck, with enough space for a small family?

    -juice
  • ballisticballistic Posts: 1,687
    The "official" XT prices I posted earlier (as quoted by a Seattle dealer) DO include destination charges ($550 for 2004). So the MSRP including destination is $25,520, and invoice including destination is $23,323. These can be seen on a webpage operated by the dealer at:
    http://www.cars101.com/subaru/forester/forester2004.html

    When you consider that a 2003 XS including the extra equipment that comes standard on the 2004 XT (Premium 7-spkr upgraded sound package, rear spoiler <YUCK!!>, and chrome tailpipe cover lists for $24,407, the 2004 XT MSRP is only $1,113 more than last year's similarly-equipped non-turbo XS. And the XT includes the nice monochrome cladding and bumpers, which could be bought on an XS only by also ordering the sunroof. All in all, I'd say that the XT is very fairly priced - big performance gain for eleven hundred bucks IMO.

    I still wish the sunroof and leather were available without the damn automatic <sigh>. Brain-dead decision, SOA.
  • kenskens Posts: 5,869
    $25.5K MSRP is at least a grand lower than I expected. That would be great news.

    So, is there yet no official word from Subaru? I wonder why it's taking so long to get the specifics out. I'm still very curious on the drivetrain/suspension changes, if any.

    Ken
  • kenskens Posts: 5,869
    Nice find, Jack. I guess the info is pretty offical, then!

    Just a little over $1000 for a huge performance boost. I think the XT is a great deal.

    Ken
  • subearusubearu Posts: 3,613
    I have to wait until the end of the year anyway since that's when I'm eligible for the IMBA discount. Maybe Merry Christmas to me! ;-) I suppose I could wait until the spring as well.

    -Brian
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Hot dang, that's a steal. Just $1113? I was hoping for "just" $2 grand.

    Hope that dealer has it right!

    -juice
  • allhorizonallhorizon Posts: 483
    Good news indeed. Let's hope the weak dollar won't force a price hike before long...

    - D.
  • ballisticballistic Posts: 1,687
    I, too was expecting (fearing) the XT would cost more. If (and it's a big if) that 0-60 time of 6.1 seconds (put out by Subaru of Canada?) actually holds up when the U.S. mags start testing the XT, then name for me any (stock) SUV that can out-accelerate an XT for less than TWICE the $25K price.

    Looks very appealing to me.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    $23,323 at invoice is just $755 more than a WRX wagon, for all the extra space plus 0.5l more displacement.

    -juice
  • subearusubearu Posts: 3,613
    $25.6k invoice for a XT Premie! Where do I sign?!?!

    -Brian
  • ballisticballistic Posts: 1,687
    Do any of you 2003 Forester owners know for certain whether the "X" 16" steel wheels can be used as winter wheels on an "XS" instead of its 16" alloys?

    Do the same lugnuts(bolts) work with either type of wheel?
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Fitment should not be a problem at all.

    Lug nuts are actually differnet for alloys vs. steel. Typically alloys have lug nuts that are chrome plated or at least colored to match the rims, while many steelie lug nuts are just open ended nuts (not sure about the Forester since they're styled steel rims with no wheel cover).

    My concern is whether the non-open lug nuts are long enough to tighten up against the steel rim.

    Check out a X vs. an XS in a dealer parking lot, they might be the same in this case, since they don't use wheel covers.

    -juice
  • beanboybeanboy Posts: 442
    Pricing seems reasonable. Can't wait to test drive it! Curious about drivetrain differences as well.

    -B
  • corkfishcorkfish Posts: 537
    I'm still skeptical about the performance of this thing. I can't believe it will break a 15 second quarter mile. If it gets into the mid 14's they won't be able to build them fast enough. Just think what the aftermarket would do.
  • lumbarlumbar Posts: 421
    Checking the website of the Seattle dealer linked above, there's a slight reduction in cargo space in the XT turbo premium v the XT turbo (as well as for the XS premium v X). The difference--1.4 cu. ft.--is the same for both rear seat down and rear seat up, so if it's a mistake, the mistake is made consistently for both numbers. The obvious question is what upgrade causes this? I'm interested because the lower it goes the closer it gets to the OBS/WRX.
     
    http://www.cars101.com/subaru/forester/forester2004.html#specs
  • forestergumpforestergump Posts: 119
    I believe the difference in cargo space is due to the moon roof. I think the same difference exists between the '03 XS and the XS Premium.
    -Bob
  • ballisticballistic Posts: 1,687
    Corkfish wrote:
    "I'm still skeptical about the performance of this thing. I can't believe it will break a 15 second quarter mile. If it gets into the mid 14's they won't be able to build them fast enough. Just think what the aftermarket would do."

    Who said anything about breaking 15 in the 1/4? I certainly don't expect that! The only actual performance claim I've seen is the 6.1 0-60 from Subaru of Canada. In my opinion, a $25,000 Forester XT doesn't have to get anywhere close to a mid-14 quartermile to be an unbeatable SUV performance bargain. If it can get into the low 15's at anything over 90mph in the quarter, show me another AWD SUV under $50,000 that can keep up! And then show me its lifetime ownership cost, including purchase price, depreciation, insurance, repair bills, and fuel, compared to the XT...

    - Jack, a skinflint who's about to pry open his checkbook for a new car for the first time in 14 years!
  • corkfishcorkfish Posts: 537
    Well, a 0 to 60 time of 6.1 seconds would tend to put the 1/4 mile at less than 15. Look at the Altima, 0 to 60 of 6.3 seconds with a 1/4 mile of 14.8. And thats with front wheel drive. The G35 with automatic transmission has similar numbers. Of course, the Forester's aerodynamics are'nt going to help, but this thing should be under 3200 pounds and has a boatload of torque.
  • beanboybeanboy Posts: 442
    Had a factory 0-60 time of 6.4 seconds when it was first released.

    No matter the stock performance of the XT, I've got a feeling a little aftermarket work will bring a great deal of power for fairly little $$$.

    I'm thinking high 14s in the quarter stock, without having to slip the clutch from 4K like the WRX. The 5-60 time will be better than the WRX.

    -B
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    corkfish: one guy on Nabisco turbo'd his Forester and runs quarters in 13.8 seconds, though he needed a racing clutch to get there. No reason to believe a factory model couldn't at least be in the 14s.

    lumbar: it's the moonroof. EPA measures all that space. Useful space is the same.

    -juice
  • ballisticballistic Posts: 1,687
    About the WRX, beanboy wrote:
    "Had a factory 0-60 time of 6.4 seconds when it was first released."

    I thought I saw 6.1 as the "official" Subaru spec. Several people have commented that Subaru of Canada's 6.1-sec XT claim is the same as was claimed for the WRX. Not so?

    "I'm thinking high 14s in the quarter stock, without having to slip the clutch from 4K like the WRX. The 5-60 time will be better than the WRX."

    That's exactly what I've been thinking. People get mid-5-second 0-60 with the WRX only by being really brutal on the launch. No sensible person drives his own car that way (or not for long!). The XT's extra cubic inches and low-down torque ought to at least match the WRX in normal driving and just might (as you predict) surpass it.
This discussion has been closed.