Howdy, Stranger!

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





2009 Subaru Forester

12122242627124

Comments

  • p0926p0926 Posts: 4,423
    I got an email today from Subaru announcing that the Forester was “On Sale Now!” I went to the build your own Forester site and an XT equipped comparable to my 04 is almost $31k!!!! I hadn’t realized how much stuff is no longer standard:

    Floor mats
    Cargo tray
    Cargo cover
    Body side molding
    Mud flaps
    Sub woofer
    Aero cross bars
    Shock sensor

    That’s over a $1,100 in options! Okay so maybe a couple of those were also optional when I got mine but still :confuse:

    -Frank
  • rshollandrsholland Posts: 19,712
    Don't forget the rear bumper protection pad too. They also dropped the turn signals in the mirrors.

    Bob
  • tinycadontinycadon Posts: 287
    Juice, were did you find the 2% under invoice on the VIP program? All I've been able to find/see is invoice, nothing under that?
  • h2k2f2h2k2f2 Posts: 44
    But they also added VDC, brake assist, curtain airbags, steering wheel audio controls, manual mode on the automatic transmission, active head restraints, hood struts, tire pressure monitoring, trip computer, telescoping steering wheel, improved fuel economy (when adjusted to the more realistic 2008 standards), reclining rear seat, folding rear tray, more ground clearance, more interior room, etc. So, depending upon how you look at it, it's actually a net gain.
  • kurtamaxxxguykurtamaxxxguy Posts: 1,749
    Telescoping steering is only on the XT series, as far as I know (and it doesn't telescope very much). Tilt steering is on all the models.

    I've not heard of anyone selling '09 Foresters at Invoice. My dealer went under MSRP a fair bit but not to Invoice for the '09, not with a whole bunch of '08's still on their lot. Their only "fire sale" was on '08 Foresters and Outbacks.
    Could happen later in the year if economy tanks, though. Whatever...mine's bought and done.
  • h2k2f2h2k2f2 Posts: 44
    p0926 was comparing a 2004 XT with a 2009 XT. I was noting a feature that the '09 XT has that the '04 XT lacks. I wasn't extending the comparison to the naturally aspirated trim levels.
  • kurtamaxxxguykurtamaxxxguy Posts: 1,749
    Looks like my '09 has decided to start creaking its dashboard where it meets the windshield. Dash Creaks show up when the car wheels drop into holes (bumps don't make much of any sound in the dash). A disappointment given the car cost nearly $31K. When it gets bad enough I will visit dealer to see if they can fix.
  • batman47batman47 Posts: 606
    You see this happen with patriotic Subarus owners.
  • h2k2f2h2k2f2 Posts: 44
    What about patriotic Mitsubishi owners? Oh and back to that 15% performance difference between 6-speed and 4-speed automatics: What was the source for your claim?
  • p0926p0926 Posts: 4,423
    Don't forget the rear bumper protection pad too. They also dropped the turn signals in the mirrors.

    Actually, I couldn't remember if the rear bumper cover was standard or not. IIRC, it's been optional for a while. I didn't list the mirror turn signals becayse they weren't available on mine and with the 09s they're not even an option. But yes they're yet another example of decontenting and I think it was a big mistake to delete them.

    But they also added VDC

    And deleted the rear LSD. It would be interesting to see an 08 and an 09 tackle the inclined traction test to see which handles it better.

    active head restraints

    Nope, they were already standard

    tire pressure monitoring

    Okay that's new but it's also mandated by law so Subaru's not exactly "giving" us something.

    curtain airbags, steering wheel audio controls, hood struts, trip computer, telescoping steering wheel, reclining rear seat, more interior room

    These are all definite improvements (and some were past due). Don't get me wrong, on the whole, I think the 09 is a better vehicle. I guess Subaru felt they had to keep the top-of-the-line-model price under the psychological $30k barrier so compromises had to be made.

    -Frank
  • h2k2f2h2k2f2 Posts: 44
    I would agree with you that some of the improvements were past due. Fortunately, some of them set the Forester apart from leading competitors. For example, the hood struts are a upscale feature that the RAV4 and CR-V lack.
  • kurtamaxxxguykurtamaxxxguy Posts: 1,749
    "But they also added VDC

    And deleted the rear LSD. It would be interesting to see an 08 and an 09 tackle the inclined traction test to see which handles it better. "


    All I've seen is how the '09 Forester handled the Catalina Island hill climbs. They appeared to do well, compared to the CR-V.

    Subaru USA, for whatever reason, is not giving me a clear answer wrt the traction issues that might occur when you follow their manual's VDC directions. Perhaps they don't yet __know__ what the vehicle will do? Perhaps their Japanese headquarters will be more forthcoming with info in future?
  • xwesxxwesx Fairbanks, AlaskaPosts: 8,651
    Kurt - this has been a problem for a few years now, but I thought it was mostly relegated to the Outback/Legacy models. How is your glove box? Quiet? Thank the manufacturer for that, if it is! Haha.

    Anyway, check out this TSB. Of course, it may not be the same rattle on yours, but my '07 and '08 Outbacks both had this rattle. It is intermittent, tends to happen (initially) over stiff bumps, and begins to evolve into a marble rattling around under the dash. This procedure was done on both cars and the problem was gone both times.

    Far more significant on mine, though, were the glove box rattles. Horrible buggers, and the dealership never did manage to alleviate the problem.
    2010 Subaru Forester, 2011 Ford Fiesta, 1969 Chevrolet C20 Pickup, 1969 Ford Econoline 100, 1976 Ford F250 Pickup, 1974 Ford Pinto Wagon
  • batman47batman47 Posts: 606
    OK mate:

    You can not stop the advance of technology . It is quite known that car manufacturing are going 6-speed and even to 7-speed just to be more economical in petrol.

    However you may try this link

    http://www.cargurus.com/Cars/viewArticle.action?site=122198

    It said:

    The only unfortunate hand-me-down that the Forester has picked up from the Impreza is the latter's four-speed automatic. Now that its rivals boast five- or six-speed automatics or even a continuously variable transmission, the Forester's four-speed auto seems a generation behind the times. Sure, it only generates around a 15 percent efficiency loss compared to the five-speed manual transmission, but surely customers will expect something more. Subaru does build a good five-speed automatic that's seen in the Legacy, Outback and Tribeca, but one of our sources tells us that Subaru just doesn't have the production capacity to include the Forester on the list. Expect a five-speed auto on the face-lifted Forester in 2010.

    Please don't get me wrong I like the 2009 Forester and I still do not make my mind up between the Forester or the Outlander and I don't have the passion of Subaru owners
  • p0926p0926 Posts: 4,423
    More gears do not necessarily a better transmission make. As has been pointed out, a well matched 4-speed is a better option than a 5-speed that is prone to gear hunting. And having more gears doesn't automatically mean that you're going to get better gas mileage, among other things, it depends on the final drive ratios.

    On the other hand, Subaru just doesn't have the production capacity to include the Forester does certainly sound plausible and regardless of how well matched the 4-speed is, buyer perception is everything and most buyers believe that the more gears the better.

    15 percent efficiency loss compared to the five-speed manual transmission

    Love that statement! Yet another reason for me to prefer manuals :P

    -Frank
  • mfletou1mfletou1 Posts: 508
    Kurt--

    www.fitzmall.com

    Learn, live it, love it.

    '09 Foresters at or $100-$200 above invoice. And they are totally legit.
  • kurtamaxxxguykurtamaxxxguy Posts: 1,749
    Thanks for the TSB , xwesx.
    I'll bet Subaru did something wrong with '09 so the same thing's in the Forester - the noise is coming right from where that center-most alignment pin probably is (I confirmed that by pressing on dash front_center and got loud creak as result), and where the hooks might be.
    I'll let my dealer know what is going on and see if it can get fixed before it evolves into a bunch of marbles.

    I've also looked very closely at the Forester's glove box. If there is squeaking going on there, I've not found it, unless it's in the hydraulic cylinder's hinge.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    C'mon now, fess up.

    You've already decided on the Outlander and you're just trying to justify a decision you've already made.

    In fact, you are now trolling the Honda Pilot boards, telling folks there you're shopping for a Pilot. I'm waiting for a "Please don't get me wrong I like the 2009 Forester 2009 Pilot..."

    You're not fooling anyone.

    Oh, and when you say "You can not stop the advance of technology ", you're absolutely right.

    Mitsubishi announced they will add a DSG-style automatic to the V6 models next year, and IMHO you'd be a fool not to wait for that tremendous upgrade. If you don't wait, your transmission will be outdated by the end of the year.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    The VIP price is just word-of-mouth, plus the deal's not available yet, anyway.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    But they also added VDC, brake assist, curtain airbags, steering wheel audio controls, manual mode on the automatic transmission, active head restraints, hood struts, tire pressure monitoring, trip computer, telescoping steering wheel, improved fuel economy (when adjusted to the more realistic 2008 standards), reclining rear seat, folding rear tray, more ground clearance, more interior room, etc. So, depending upon how you look at it, it's actually a net gain.

    I'll add a couple of things:

    * dual exhaust outlets that look better, symmetrical
    * wider opening doors for easier ingress/egress

    The latter was an issue with my 98. Narrow doors, plus a deep foot well made it tricky to get in the rear seats. Not so with the 2009.

    I can also add to Frank's list of things that disappeared, to be fair:

    * bumper protector (my 98 had it)
    * dash-top lidded storage bin
  • batman47batman47 Posts: 606
    I haven't made up my mind yet mate.

    I have $35,000 to spend. If you extend your search you will see that I have also made some queries about 2009 Volkswagen Tiguan, 2009 Honda Pilot, 2009 Kia Borrego, 2009 Dodge Journey, 2009 Subaru Forester, and 2008 Mitsubishi Outlander.

    I am not patriotic to any of those makes, just looking what will fulfill my interest and value for money.

    Lets just hear about finding "faults" on this new Forester. For example the 2008 Honda Pilot has a lot of owner complaints about a vibration problem in this car. I will buy a SUV vehicle about June/July..this year.
  • kurtamaxxxguykurtamaxxxguy Posts: 1,749
    I've posted a fair bit here comparing '08 Outback to '09 Forester.

    Faults I have found so far in '09 Forester are dashboard creaking, some minor misalignment in doors (look real close and some of the door curves do not match each other), and it's using a lot of gas for its size (17 - 18 mpg is best so far; again, turbo version, not fully broken in).

    As for Tiguan, looked promising but VW has had too many reliability problems for me to trust a first year VW, and unless you have a great dealer nearby, getting good service and part support could be an issue. Their AWD will be some form of Haldex system.
  • rshollandrsholland Posts: 19,712
    and it's using a lot of gas for its size (17 - 18 mpg is best so far; again, turbo version, not fully broken in).

    That is a lot. I just filled up my WRX today and recorded a bit over 26 mpg. I've never gotten below 21 mpg for a tank average.

    I wouldn't expect you to get that kind of mileage, as the F-XT is heavier, it's an automatic, as well as being less aero-friendly.

    Bob
  • tntmythtntmyth Posts: 70
    I still have not evolved to be convinced that I need a 5 or 6 speed transmission. although I do understand that the more gears, theoretically gets better mileage. Probably since I have not yet had an automatic with more than 4 speeds. I have driven a Dodge Caliber we rented with CVT and the transmission as the car accelerated felt mushly like a sewing machine. My wife and I did not like it. We missed the sensation of the shifting of the gears. Could not get used to it over a week rental.
    I have read that with more power like on the Nissan Murano 6 cylinder, it is more acceptable.
    Someone mentioned that Subaru gets their 5 speed auto transmission from Nissan. Would the new 5 speed auto transmission anticipated in the 2010 Forester be as good and durable as the existing 4 speed they are using? Is there a potential downside? Would would we really get better gas mileage? Is it a worthy reason to wait for the 2010's? Do you think Subaru will risk sales by putting a CVT exclusively in their cars? In one test I saw the Murano with CVT could not even begin to make it up a hill that the Forester ran right up.
  • batman47batman47 Posts: 606
    The CVT appears to be very good with engine 6-cyl and above. However when the CVT is used in a 4-cyl engines, the engine noise is noticeable when climbing, for example or overtaking. I said this in a Rogue (Nissan) forum and the Rogue patriotic almost took my head off.

    The same problem has been noticed with the 4-cyl Outlanders that are implemented with CVT (ES, SE). Equally, the 2009 Nissan Murano 6-cyl has CVT but the noise of the 4-cyl are not in the 6-cyl Murano. Many reviews about the Murano say so. Generally they praise the Nissan engine as the best in the world. Some people like the peculiar noise others don’t.

    Furthermore, the mechanism of the CVT is very different that the mechanism of 5 or 6 or 7 speed gears. I like traditional SUV (let say something box shape) and the Murano is not in my short list of prospective SUV to buy. Although a few disagree, more number of speed gears is better for petrol economy, specially for long journeys, where engaging the transmission at the higher gear will give you more mileages. I say this because it happens to me.

    The 2008 Pilot has Variable Cylinder Management (VCM) where the engine switch from 6-cyl to 3-cyl when required (The 2009 Pilot 6-5-4-3) this is an alternative technology. However a great number of 2008 Pilots have complained about ghost vibrations, suspension problems and even premature brake discs replacement.
  • tkaytkay Posts: 99
    Same problem I had with my Sienna. Can be very annoying,and it won't go away. Spend 30K on a vehicle and it's like they don't test them very well. would even B--ch about door alignment (maybe they will offer you something) What they did with the Toyota was take off the dash and lay a foundation (I think some kind of mat cloth) and put the dash back on and that did the trick. GOOD LUCK!
  • dcwestbydcwestby Posts: 29
    CVTs... Many of you seem to forget one of the first vehicles that had a CVT here in the American markets.. The Ford Freestyle. I had a Freestyle for a couple years, and I really liked it. The main power of a CVT is the computer and the software within. The Freestyle also had a torque converter as well.

    Granted the vehicle was slightly over 2 tons in weight, but once it actually started out, you could certainly suprise a few people with the acceleration it could hand out. Theres been a couple times where I've passed a slowly accelerating semi on an onramp[2 lane fade to one] using the freestyle's acceleration.

    Consequently, when I got my 08 forester last october, I'm pushing it very nearly the same way I did the freestyle as far as acceleration. doesnt help mileage too much I suppose. In my mind, gears are more complex then the CVT method. One car I had, the trans locked into first gear once [granted, it had 100kmiles on it]. And thats the reason I liked the CVT because there are far fewer mechanical components that could cause problems in the future.

    Admittedly, it could be a form of "exercise" for the geared transmission to suddenly accelerate from 30mph to 50 before snapping back into 3rd or 4th gear. But I dont know my way around cars mechanically that well so yeah. I like simpler the better myself. Yet, I too agree that 5 speeds would be best optimum for fuel economy purposes.

    CVT vs geared isnt so much the issue as it is actually driving habits and how you treat the accelerator in start from stop or get up and go situations. I myself dont get as much fuel econ because I tend towards acceleration[entering freeway]. Even though we could go on about acceleration and transmissions for a long while, this thread is about the new forester...

    I had my first impressions of it yesterday. and I must say that I need to perhaps talk about renting one for a day or something in order to see if its truly worth the extra monthly payment cost. I like the layout in someways, but I would prefer the cupholders beside the gear selector rather then the p brake, because the center storage where the aux input resides is a bit of a reach. the headroom is a plus, but the manual seat adjustment version seems to offer less legroom for the driver then the power seat version. I love the blue/black hud instruments. I only wish thered be the ETE [estim. time to empty, or estim miles to empty] and the other fuel estimation gadgets besides average mpg. I think someone knows what I'm talking about as there was one category of fuel usage that seemed the most accurate other then average, but the exact name escapes me.

    One thing I didnt get to do which I should is test the 09 on the freeway, because that is where I seem to spend half my time driving.

    One thing I'm curious about, is the pzev [partial zero emmission vehicle] how does that work? is there some methos to which the engine uses the fumes to reuse or convert some of that spent energy into something engine usable or what?
  • kurtamaxxxguykurtamaxxxguy Posts: 1,749
    17.9 mpg, per latest fill-up calculation for '09 Forester XT.

    Most driving is to and from work. This involves going down a half mile, 600 foot high mountain, then city driving of up to 45 mph with many traffic lights. Going home is the reverse (all the lights, then up the hill). Temperatures have averaged 32 to 55 degrees. A lot of rain, a tiny bit of snow.

    FYI, my former '04 Malibu Maxx was guzzling gas under same conditions here (guess was Maxx got about 18 mpg - I was filling tank a lot more in Portland OR). In S. Calif. , where most of my driving was Freeway, the Maxx got 24 mpg.

    Wrt Forester XT, its tip-in, while smooth, is more aggressive than the Maxx (but less, fortunately, than Outback in Sport Sharp mode). A light foot's needed to save gas :shades:

    Also, the XT's trans does a good job trying to match itself to speed and engine loads. Sport shift really makes a difference (it will hold gears longer and let the car downshift faster in passing situations). However, it's an adaptive trans, and Subaru warns that disconnecting battery or transmission services "reset" the transmission so that it has to re-learn your driving style.
  • p0926p0926 Posts: 4,423
    Personally, I view CVTs as still evolving technology. They very well may be the way of the future but I'm not yet ready to anoint them thusly.

    5 speeds would be best optimum for fuel economy purposes

    Based on what? If 5 speeds are good, shouldn't 6 speeds be better and 7 speeds even better? Much more important than the number of gears is how well matched the transmission is with the engine and how the transmission is programmed. A well designed auto transmission shifts smoothly, quickly and correctly anticipates which gear you need to be in.

    -Frank
Sign In or Register to comment.