Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Changes You'd Like To See in the Subaru Forester
This discussion has been closed.
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
Impreza's wheelbase is 103.9", and that's probably long enough that the Forester will get the same thing.
The gas tank is 16.9 gallons, so again, Forester should get at least as big a tank.
A more compact rear suspension means much less wheel intrustion, so again I'd expect more cargo space on the Forester.
It'll probably arrive for model year 2009, but calendar year 2008.
2021 Jeep Wrangler Sahara 4xe Granite Crystal over Saddle
2024 Audi Q5 Premium Plus Daytona Gray over Beige
2017 BMW X1 Jet Black over Mocha
VDC on more models
2 row curtain airbag
longer wheelbase for rear seat room
telescoping steering wheel
audio controls on steering wheel
A 5EAT would be nice, keep it boxy for cargo, and keep the huge moonroof. An added bonus would be if the front passenger seat folded flat to handle long items like the Jeep Patriot.
Perhaps if they could have seen the blinking red security light instead of it being hidden behind the steering column they might not have tried in the first place.
Take a look. If you come up from the back, you can see it, but if you are right at the side, it isn't immediately visible and you have to look to one side of the steering column...
Grrrr, not at Subaru...just Grrr...
-mike
That's a mistake they made with the 08 WRX.
In Topeka they do and sitting in your driveway... LA, NY, maybe not. Heck, sitting in your car doesn't stop them there...
Assuming the '09 Forester will get:
1) A 16.9 fuel tank (up one gallon from the current model)
2) The double-wishbone suspension, doing away with the strut towers in the cargo area, allowing for a flat cargo floor
3) Steering wheel controls
4) More leg and hip room for rear passengers, and
5)(Fingers crossed) a 5EAT with paddle shifters - at least on the turbo'd version - an update I think we'll probably see on the '09 Impreza as well.
All of that will address most of my complaints about my 2006 XT. And it goes without saying that if Subaru doesn't preserve the interchangability of the new Forester and Impreza models, like they have now, then they're nuts. A lot of the Forester's appeal, for enthusiasts at least, is being able to scavange the enormous Impreza aftermarket bin.
Doug
What are the advantages, disadvantages?
-mike
Regards,
Kyle
-mike
-mike
Didn't seem like the Forester would sacrifice much clearance. And I understand your concern because our Legacy's control arms are much closer to the ground than any part of the suspension of our Forester.
* VDC across the board
* 5EAT with Sportshift
VDC is much, much, MUCH more important in this class. Right now Hyundai has advertisements boasting that they make it standard, and Subaru is behind. Offering it only on some models in an SUV of any sort is suicide.
I hope the WRX gets a 5EAT phased in for MY2009, so the Forester should get it too, and on all models! :shades:
Ford Escapes are higher off the ground than a Forester, but due to those (I think wishbone suspension) things next to the wheels that are part of the suspension, they do not have a "higher" ground clearance. Next time you are behind an Escape/Tribute take a look at what I am talking about.
I have driven in ruts in Utah on pretty easy off road type stuff where those things would have been carving rocks and dirt or lifting the whole thing up in the air while bending no doubt while a Forester chugged along...
And thus my earlier question... I can see a better design, but you are still going to need some type of lateral structure you do not need on the straight down strut/spring setup on present Suby's. And that is going to seemingly have some impact on "clear" ground clearance.
We'll have to see how it looks and drives when it comes out.
No offense to Forester owners out there but the Forester is not an "off-road" vehicle, at best it's a dirt-road vehicle, but let's be honest it's no Rubicon.
They may have different shaped wishbones for the forester v. impreza. Here is a shot I took at NYIAS of the underside:
-mike
If you look at the same view of an Escape or CR-V, they are several inches lower than the rear diffy.
Ha ha, found a really funny pic:
You can see, near the rear wheel, just how low those lateral link are.
I don't see the center of gravity issue being of much concern unless you plan on racing one. The Forester already has a much lower CG than anything else in its class. Besides, it's a utility vehicle intended to haul stuff. That the XT can also haul [non-permissible content removed] is just an added benefit :P
-Frank
-mike
These "rollover" "lower center of gravity" arguments would be great for other vehicles, but that has always been one of Suby's best features...
Heck I'm not even sure my Armada has that sticker in it, I'll have to check it next time I'm in it.
-mike
I'm sure if I'm wrong someone will set me straight
-Frank
Bob
Kyle
tidester, host
SUVs and Smart Shopper
A little more knee room for tall drivers.
Head rests that tilt for long commutes.
Rear seats that recline a little more.
Rear seats that recline a little more.
Believe it or not my 1998 model has both.
The rear seats recline almost all the way. The rear head rests also tilt. And they are interchangeable with the fronts, so I swapped them out and have tilting head rests. :shades:
-mike
-Frank
1) This model has the "high-end" audio system (MP3-capable), but the two front door speakers are simply terrible. When the engine is on, and at normal volume, they vibrate with the panel with such distortion that it is impossible to listen to some music. We also have a 2005 Volvo S40 T5 with a good audio system, and, while it's not MP3-capable, CD's and radio music sounds GREAT. Two Subaru dealer service depts claim they cannot hear the problem, and now the warranty on the audio system is close to expiring. This problem really strengthens the image of Subarus as being (and sounding) "tinny""! :P
2) I got the heavy duty floor mats with this XT Sport. The driver's mat has a hook that is supposed to prevent the mat from sliding up under the pedals, but, because this mat is so thick, it quickly slips up and off the hook. One dealer's service guy actually thought there was a different hook available for this mat, so, at no charge to me, he ordered and installed it: it was the exact same hook!! If anyone knows a homemade solution to securing the mat to the hook, I'm listening. :confuse:
I replace the base speakers on my Forester with premium sound speakers, and they are only slightly less bad. To be fair that was a 1998 model.
The pin that holds my floor mat in place broke off the first year I owned the vehicle. I never bothered to replace it.
Does the hook go all the way into your floor mat? If so, you'd think that it would provide enough resistance to prevent the mat from sliding. I've never had a problem with the standard mats sliding.
-Frank
When I swapped it in for a while, the standard mat did not slide at all. The heavy duty mat is much thicker, and the hook is too short to hold it securely. Just wish someone at Subaru had thought this through to where they either: a) re-worked the hole in the mat so the original hook could hold it, or b) offered a bigger hook.
So my first wish would be the transmission. My second wish would be for them to make changes to the 3.0 H6 to allow it to run on regular fuel without compromise, and offer it on the Forester. Some of the changes made to the H6 for the Tribeca, like the cooling system, and valve actuation system, should be easily transferred to the 3.0, and leave it at 3.0 for a good balance of economy and performance.
I would most likely buy a new Forester if it had the transmission, but would definitely buy one if it had the trans and the H6.
If I got a 3rd wish, I would like to see the AWD bias for the automatic system changed to the 45/55 as is in the Tribeca.
The more I think about what I have said I guess what I am asking for is a slightly smaller, more economical Tribeca type Forester.
At 110 km/h, (~70 mph), the 4EAT is still well below 3000 rpm, (I think it's around 2400 or 2600 ... can't remember for sure).
I can tell you that the 4th gear in the 4EAT is a lower ratio (0.694) compared to the 5MT (0.738), and compared to the 6MT (0.756). Lower ratio means lower RPM at highway speed.
More gears ≠ better highway mileage
You also neglect final drive ratios and tire sizes too. In the case of the Forester the tire sizes are the same but the final drive ratios are different between the manual and the auto. The manual uses a 4.111 final drive while the auto uses a 4.44. The top gear in the auto has to be lower to compensate for this on the highway.
The highway RPMs end up being similar on both Foresters. At 75 MPH the manual has 3022 and the auto has 2904. However the Tribeca has 2593. At 70 the numbers are 2820/2710/and 2420.
Subaru does a great job with gear ratios and final drive ratios, including giving good launch characteristics in 1st gear, but using a 5 speed auto would give them better options for matching what is needed for launch and highway cruising. Somewhere around 350 to 400 RPMs lower at "real" highway speeds would provide for better fuel mileage.
400 RPMs is roughly the difference between driving at 65 instead of 75 in the Forester. Anyone who has done this knows the mileage at 65 is much better than at 75. This discounts increased drag but that delta is a small part of the equation at these 2 speeds.
So add it, sure, just make sure it performs exactly like the 4 speed currently does.
I'd like the see them raise the passenger seat an inch or so, and how about round cup holders instead of square ones?
Minor nit picks, to be fair.
If you keep the speeds down, you can get phenomenal gas mileage in the Forester - we can break 30mpg fairly easily. Drive fast and it's closer to 27mpg. Good numbers for the class.