Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Subaru Forester (up to 2005)

1…9394969899…344

Comments

  • armac13armac13 Member Posts: 1,129
    You are forgiven and congratulations. Remember, don't Valium and drive.
    :-)

    Ross
  • subaru_teamsubaru_team Member Posts: 1,676
    Deep breath now, this too shall pass - - - Have a wonderful wedding and best of everything in the future!

    Patti
  • subaru_teamsubaru_team Member Posts: 1,676
    If my memory is failing me, sorry in advance! If not, please wish Susan a belated (yesterday??) happy birthday for me!

    Patti
  • lilbluewgn02lilbluewgn02 Member Posts: 1,089
    Your memory hasn't failed...it was her birthday yesterday...I will pass on your greetings to her. Expect an e-mail
  • bsvollerbsvoller Member Posts: 528
    I think that most on this board would be comfortable characterizing Subaru's reliability and quality as "rivaling" if not exactly "equaling" Honda's and Toyota's.

    That said, the most recent trend in this particular segment seems to be in Subaru's favor, with CR now ranking the Forester first in reliability over the RAV4 and the CRV. This is partly due to the CRV being new and therefore not ranked this year, but any way you cut it, the Forester is statistically very, very good on both points.

    That said, the CRV AWD system is part-time, whereas the Forester's of course is full-time. I've seen reports that the CRV's system *can* overheat under prolonged use, such as a prolonged drive under bad conditions through the mountains. If this happens, it drops out, leaving you in 2WD. I can't substantiate those reports though, so treat it as a rumor for now.

    The Subaru AWD system is world rally tested and proven under extreme conditions (they dominate the world rally circuit), and is designed from the get go for full-time engagement for the life of the car. I don't think you have any worries there.

    I don't know how the Toyota system compares mechanically, but someone here knows, I'm sure.

    As to why other manufacturer's don't use Boxer's, I suspect the primary reason is cost. Boxer's are more expensive to make, because you have 2 overhead cam valve trains to manage rather than one. On a small displacement engine going into an entry-level vehicle, that creates tradeoffs from a pricing perspective. They also don't fit that well into an engine bay because of their shape, so there are design tradeoffs that have to be considered when scaling them up to drive larger vehicles.

    Am I being fair here, guys ?
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    you pretty much nailed it.

    Bob
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    The RAV4 uses a VC system pretty much like the ones in manual trans Subarus. Both are designed to work full-time and should be extremely durable. Subaru does actually have the edge in overall reliability. :-)

    Why aren't boxers more popular? They are expensive to manufacture. My engine is a big 4 cylinder, with a whopping 4 camshafts! The Phase II engines (1999 and later) went to SOHC but still use 2 camshafts because of the layout.

    But don't take my word for it, ask BMW. Their motorcycles are boxers, and I will quote from their very own brochure, it's "the most technically advanced" and "carries its weight low in the chassis for an improved center of gravity and better balance."

    I couldn't say it better myself. Porsche won't argue with that, either.

    -juice
  • johnfanjohnfan Member Posts: 1
    I went to test drive the CR-V last week. The was my first choice for my wife's new car. I have to say the exterior looks very nice. But once I get into the car, I almost cried. What a cheap interior it has! The old Chevette I had 10 years ago looked just like it. My wife told me immediately that she does not want it.
    We then went on to Subaru dealer to test drive Forester. What a difference! The top of the line model has the feel of a luxury car. It drives better, much more quite than the CR-V. It is a little more expensive than CR-V, but you get what you are paying for. We decided to get a Forester as soon as the 2003 model come out. I read on the net that it is much improved.
  • forester_hikeforester_hike Member Posts: 4
    (Sorry, this is long--my questions are at the end) I recently had the experience of driving my 2000 Forester L (48K miles) on a fresh surface of snow during a fast-moving snowstorm. Temps were in about the low 20's, and accumulation was about 1-2 inches. I live in a warm climate, so I don't normally drive in snow, but when I have driven in snow before, I never had the ABS react the way it did this time. Basically, I could not stop at stop signs. I was driving about 20-25 mph and beginning my stops well in anticipation of the intersections. I could slow just fine to ~10 mph, but after that, the brake pedal would start pushing back, and I would hear an awful electronic buzzing sound (presumably the ABS).

    When I returned home, I had the brakes checked out just to be sure there was no problem with the ABS system. Of course the dealer said that they could not test under the same conditions I was driving in, but it felt to me that the ABS system might be functioning out of parameters (i.e. it's not supposed to activate under 6 mph). The dealer found nothing wrong with the ABS, but I had to pay $45 for the inspection, being out of warranty.

    Just for curiosity, I later took the Forester out for a spin on a nearby dirt lot to try out the ABS under different driving conditions. I accelerated to ~15 mph and then slammed on the brakes. The ABS behaved as follows: I immediately felt the brake pedal pushing back, and heard the same electronic buzz that I heard in the snow. The buzz sound and pushing back lasted until about 1 sec. after I had come to a complete stop. My question: Is it normal for the ABS to stay activated until after the car has stopped? As for the 6 mph limit, does that mean that the ABS won't activate only when braking begins at or below 6 mph? And for anyone who normally drives in snow, is it normal for the ABS to kick in just before stopping (when on fresh snow)?
  • kenskens Member Posts: 5,869
    johnfan,

    The 2003 Forester is supposed to get an even improved interior so I believe it's worth waiting for.

    Ken
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    You were probably going too fast for the conditions, or you have the stock tires with 48K miles on them, which would most likely be useless in the snow.

    -mike
  • forester_hikeforester_hike Member Posts: 4
    The stock tires unfortunately wore out very quickly. I currently have Dueler H/L's with about 13K on them. As for going too fast, it's possible, but I was slowing down for the conditions.
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    But I found even when I slow down for conditions I generally still drive too fast for them.

    -mike
  • forester_hikeforester_hike Member Posts: 4
    Yes, it's possible no speed was really slow enough for the conditions. My main concern is whether the ABS was functioning properly. Should the brake pedal continue pushing back even when my speed has fallen below 6 mph? If the ABS had disengaged once the speed had fallen below that speed, I feel like I would have been able to "wedge" the front wheels in order to stop.
  • bsvollerbsvoller Member Posts: 528
    The CR-V is an entry-level economy vehicle ? Wow ! You drive some pretty nice economy vehicles then...

    How 'bout a Focus as an entry-level economy vehicle, or a Neon, etc. They sell for 2/3's what the CR-V is going for, are smaller, lighter, no AWD, etc.

    The CR-V might be an entry-level SUV, but that get's back into the whole "what's an SUV" thing again... :)

    Anything that goes for nearly 20k can't be considered entry-level in my book, even if the "average" is a bit higher than that (I bet the median price isn't much different).

    Just my .02
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Congrats in advance, John. I'll be looking at a 2003 as well, so maybe we'll own two!

    I've heard the Dueler H/Ls were better than the H/Ts, but I haven't sampled them.

    ABS can be bad in the snow, because in a way you want skidding - it piles up snow in front of the tires and shortens stopping distances. I'm not sure, but is ABS disabled when you pull up the parking brake just one click? That might work if you're in those conditions again.

    I'd suggest testing the car in a parking lot, perhaps with the parking brake at one click.

    On mine, yes, the ABS works at all speeds.

    -juice
  • jdwagsjdwags Member Posts: 3
    Thanks to all you Subaru folks for your feedback on my questions concerning AWD, boxer engines, and reliability. It is hard not to like a product produced by a company named Fuji Heavy Industries. Just the name gives me confidence.

    From reading some of the earlier posts, I've decided to wait for the 2003 Forester to come out before I make up my mind to buy. May even wait for the turbo to come out the following year.

    At any rate, I'll be looking forward to reading what you current Forester owners have to say here once you have a chance to try out the 2003.

    I do believe Consumer Reports will be reporting on small SUV's in the May issue. I wish they had waited to include the 2003 Forester in their comparison.

    One last question. Why did Subaru choose to go from a double overhead cam engine to a single as Juice noted in post #4761?

    -wags
  • bsvollerbsvoller Member Posts: 528
    Subaru went to what they call the Phase II 2.5l engine in MY1999. The changes to the head were made to increase low end torque - they roughly doubled the torque available at 3000 rpm, while maintaining the same high-end output.

    This was accomplished by changing the valve angles to increase the charge tumbling, among other things. Going to an SOHC instead of the old DOHC design enabled them to reduce friction and increase the life of the timing belt. Recommended change interval went from 60k to 105k miles.

    At the same time, they met passenger car NLEV emissions, which as I understand it, means that they meet the 2004 proposed standard now (i.e. as of 1999). Not too shabby...
  • forester_hikeforester_hike Member Posts: 4
    Thanks for your suggestion, Juice. I was so excited by the prospect of being able to disable the ABS by simply pulling up on the parking brake, that I just went out and tried that. Unfortunately, that does not disable the ABS. I tested this out a few ways. First, I left the parking brake at one click, accelerated to ~15 mph, and then slammed on the brake pedal. ABS kicked in. Then, I tested the ABS by accelerating to 15 mph, then simultaneously pulling up several clicks on the parking brake and slamming on the brake pedal. In that case, the ABS still activated. In a third test, I pulled up hard on the parking brake first, then hit the brake pedal while still pulling up. The ABS still activated. So, pulling the fuse seems to be the only way to disable the ABS, but I have read on other message boards that SOA advises against doing that. Of course, one could always try stopping with just the parking brake :-)

    I also tested out the 6 mph limit, which can be tricky since the speedometer doesn't start registering until exceeding 5 mph. I tested this by coasting and waiting until the needle dropped to the 5 mph mark and then slamming on the brakes. The ABS did not activate, so at least on dirt, it seems to be functioning within parameters. I'd be interested in what anyone driving on snow finds out.
  • kenskens Member Posts: 5,869
    wags,

    The other reason (and probably the bigger one IMO) for going from DOHC to SOHC was cost. The SOHC engine has fewer moving parts and is most likely less expensive for Subaru to build.

    The timing belt change frequency did not change between Phase I and II, however. Both are 105K miles.

    Ken
  • joseph50joseph50 Member Posts: 235
    Wow. Searching for ABS low limits on various surfaces. Various emergency brake pulls. Can anyone say, "e-s-o-t-e-r-i-c"? But interesting reading for sure! But I also enjoyed a recent (Sports Illustrated) quote by a veteran NASCAR driver when asked what the pros do when "stuff" - like an 18 car pile up - happens. Response: "Aw, we all have our eyes closed." ;0)
  • tincup47tincup47 Member Posts: 1,508
    I'm surprised you would fall for marketing hype. While BMW uses the boxer engine in some of their bikes, they also offer a flat inline 4 and a Rotax built Single. In fact, the inline 4 engine (along with the 750 flat 3) were going to be the only engines available in their bikes. That was until there was lack of acceptance by traditional BMW owners, which led to development of the excellent (although down on power to comparable 4 cylinder engines)boxers they have now. In their automobile lineup, inline 4, 6, and V8's are the engines of choice with the inline sixes being on Wards Automotive's top 10 engines for several years.
  • subiemansubieman Member Posts: 10
    I've had the same ABS behaviors since my Subaru was new (with new tires.) I was unable to come to a complete stop in snowy (or low-traction) situations without some difficulty. There is a strong metallic crunching sound and seemingly no braking action at low speeds.

    Its kinda fun when no one is around, but as indicated in my post in General Maintenance, I slammed into a rock ledge last week partly because of this problem. I've seen this ABS "noise" mentioned before...i guess Subaru's system is just quirky.
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    You people need to go slower in the snow. You need to leave 3-5x the distance you would leave in RAIN! Sorry but that is the truth. I've slid my cars with and without ABS in the snow due to going too fast for the conditions, not because my ABS caused a problem.

    -mike
  • suzzannsuzzann Member Posts: 56
    That crunching noise is the ABS working. The brakes are activated and released several times a second.

    I drive on snow and mud quite often. Hate to suggest it, but perhaps you're backing off the brake pedal when the sound starts? Mine works flawlessly, but remember you still have to steer the car while braking!
  • joseph50joseph50 Member Posts: 235
    Just to remind, when I inquired here about braking on snow a few weeks ago, I was taught by others to do the old-fashioned foot pump stop (threshold braking is the term juice used), ABS or not. No mashing allowed.
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    Is how you should use ABS, pumping will cause problems as suzann mentioned above.

    -mike
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I agree with the description of the changes for the Phase II engine except for one thing - at very high rpm power drops off sooner, in fact they lowered the red line a little. That's fine, the new engine just doesn't require as many revs.

    Jon: oh well, it was worth a shot.

    The best thing about ABS is that you keep control of your steering. My Miata lacks ABS and is RWD, so that thing is a real handful in the snow. A simple drop of the throttle send you spinning in a turn. Stab the brakes and hello, 360. It's fun when you're playing, but I never, ever drive my Miata in the snow to get anywhere.

    tincup: I wasn't falling for the hype, I just found it amusing to hear BMW talk about how great boxers are in print. I like their silky smooth in-line sixes, too.

    -juice
  • bkaiser1bkaiser1 Member Posts: 464
    I've never heard of this on any of my cars, but my 01 OB definately will engage its abs below that speed if I stomp on the brakes. Backing down my short, snowy driveway (I'm guessing just a couple mph) can be enough to activate it. Incidentally, I've have had ABS-equipped cars for at least a decade living here in the snow and I honestly do not understand why some people overreact to ABS and insist on disabling it. I understand the "wedge theory" of getting some snow/dirt built up in front of the wheel to slow you faster in some situations, but in practice I doubt there is any real advantage. And on ice, there's absolutely nothing to "wedge" in front of the tire. A good friend of mine was in an accident several years ago on a slick road and he swears it was the ABS's fault for sending him through a guardrail...I tend to disagree. If you're driving too fast, ABS or not, you're going to have trouble stopping on ice/snow. Period. I can't imagine owning a car without it anymore.
  • peterson10peterson10 Member Posts: 116
    I typically drive with extreme-paranoid-caution when slick snow is on the roads. Still, I've had a few occasions to experience the rapture of Subaru's ABS and feel its a trade-off between distance and steering-control. Having learned to drive in Western NY (the glorious lake-effect snow belt) I intinctively feather/pulse the brakes in all adverse conditions and, hence, only ever have the ABS engage at fairly low speeds. On those occasions when the ABS kicks in I let up on the brake pedal momentarily (fraction of a second) every car length or so, and find the stopping distance to be less with no diminished steering control. Question: I know that pulsing the brakes defeats the ABS, but does it do any damage to the system?

    BTW, I recall reading a few years ago that Subaru's ABS was unique in the industry; developed from FHI's aircraft landing-gear technology. Did I dream this or have others heard the same?

    YetAnotherDave
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    ABS does the pumping for you, much quicker than you could. Also, in 4 sensor, 4 channel systems like all Subies have, it's like having 4 brake pedals. In split traction scenarios, even a pro cannot match ABS, unless he equipped his car with 4 brake pedals and used both legs and both arms, all independently and right at the treshold of lockup.

    That's a funny image to have in my head. I guess you'd need long arms, like a primate, too.

    -juice
  • kenskens Member Posts: 5,869
    LOL, juice! So how does a driver steer in that kind of setup?

    I've also heard about Subaru's extensive development for their ABS. I thought I read somewhere (i-club?) that Subaru designed their ABS to release more completely compared to other systems to retain control on ice. I've also read how Subaru develops their ABS by testing it extensively on gravel roads in Australia too.

    Ken
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    With his teeth, of course!

    It just cracks me up when someone claims he can modulate his brakes better than ABS can (it was mentioned in another thread, BTW). It's simply not possible. At best you would be at the treshold of the tire with the LEAST grip. At best!

    Foresters are raced on ice in France, I had a really cool photo of one setup for this type of racing.

    -juice
  • kenskens Member Posts: 5,869
    Talk about multitasking! :-)

    Maybe the claims of being able to modulate brakes better than ABS were true in the early days. I'm going to guess that 4-channel ABS wasn't always the case.

    Ken
  • p0926p0926 Member Posts: 4,423
    Hmmmm.... well my Panoz driving school instructors (all current or former race car drivers) claimed that an experienced driver could stop in a shorter distance using threshold braking. The argument being that ABS sacrifices some stopping distance in order to ensure steering control.

    Okay, it sounds like we have a challenge... which will stop a vehicle in the shortest distance? Threshold braking or ABS.

    All you need is a measured and marked section of pavement. Make a series of 3(?) runs where you slam on the brakes at the beginning of the measured section of road and keep them floored and let the ABS do its thing. Then make a second set of 3 runs with the ABS disabled. This time use threshold braking (defined as getting on the brakes hard and then gradually backing off in order to stay just ahead of the point where the tires would lose traction). Average the stopping distances for each set of runs and the shorter avg wins. Anybody willing to perform this experiment?

    -Frank P.
  • joseph50joseph50 Member Posts: 235
    Juice's message 4681:I would just try threshold braking - at the limit before lockup. It's tough on uneven slippery surfaces, though.

    -juice

    See previous entry on thread.
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    Frank you are 100% correct. Non ABS will stop in a shorter distance, but...

    With ABS you retain steering control and can steer around an obstacle whereas without ABS there is no steering control and you smack into the object.

    I was an anti-abs type person til about a month ago. I was cruising down a 4-lane blvd. you know with traffic lights and cross traffic. A buse made a left turn across my side of the road to go into a depot. I figured he would stop when he saw me, but just came across the road. I was doing about 50-55mph. Slammed on my brakes in the Trooper but there was no was I was stopping in time. Due to ABS I was able to take a 90 degree turn, in control and squeeze between a pole and the bus onto the curb into the bus lot w/o hitting anything. Had I not had ABS I would have smacked square into the bus.

    -mike
  • tincup47tincup47 Member Posts: 1,508
    As an ex-SCCA club racer, I agree that in an anticipated stopping situation (like at a corner entrance) threshold braking allows you to slow marginally quicker. In a panic situation, 99% of drivers will lock the brakes up, effectively losing steering control of the vehicle. We used to refer to this loss of attitude control as "going ballistic", which had the value of leaving the track in a straight line instead of looping around into another vehicles path. This worked due to the runoff areas designed into most tracks but is not recommended on street courses. On the street I want ABS, I want to be able to steer.
  • joseph50joseph50 Member Posts: 235
    I should have typed message #4642, quoting Juice from Feb. 28, responding to lakepop
  • jeijei Member Posts: 143
    I find I have to be careful about not going too fast on snow & ice with our Subarus. AWD can impart a false sense of "normalcy" in bad conditions that you just don't feel in most regular 2 wheel drive vehicles. I firmly believe that ABS is a compromise, trading better control for slightly longer stopping distances in some situations. Along the lines of what bkaiser1 said, if you're going too fast for conditions, ABS won't bring the moving mass of the car to a stop any sooner. It's through the intersection straight ahead instead of sideways.

    I'd rather have that compromise, even though I've comfortably driven lesser vehicles in snowy, icy places for some years. ABS, *along with good tires*, take some of the variables out of real-life braking situations for ordinary drivers. Less is left to skill or luck, such as at night on a road with patches of ice and dry pavement. My instinct has been to feather the brakes, not stomp & stay. After 3 years I'm used to my Forester's ABS, but have to remember to drive so I don't need it in normal circumstances. Tires are key. When I took our '92 Legacy with its all-season tires out on a slippery winter day, I was into the ABS right away and had to back off. My habits were used to the winter tires on the Forester. How easy it is to rely on advanced techonology.

    - John
  • danielldaniell Member Posts: 128
    My Forester only has 4,500 miles. Yes I turn the gas cap a few clicks. Light stays on (not blinking). Not a good sign with such a new car.
  • c_hunterc_hunter Member Posts: 4,487
    My experience has been that AWD gives you traction that can easily exceed a car's braking capabilities in adverse weather, ABS or not. Yeah, it's great that we can accelerate on wet and snowy roads, but that can cause trouble when it's time to slow down.

    The one major benefit of 4-channel ABS in my opinion is that it can provide even braking no matter how traction varies from wheel to wheel. Never mind that you can still steer if needed -- the big benefit is that you can also keep going straight!! So many non-ABS cars will lock up one wheel early, and it can cause major stability problems. 4-channel ABS is nice because it will help keep the car on course.

    Craig
  • p0926p0926 Member Posts: 4,423
    daniell- How far have you driven it since tightening the gas cap? It takes at least a 1/2 tank before the CEL goes off (if that's the cause). If you're sure the CEL isn't related to the gas cap, you should take in into the dealer to be diagnosed.

    Personally I don't think that the CEL is indicative of a poorly designed or manufactured vehicle. Many of today's makes and models have recurrent CEL problems with the frequency of CEL occurences being directly related to the government's stricter emissions standards. In the vast majority of cases it turns out to be a minor problem with the emissions system.

    -Frank P.
  • vonnyvoncevonnyvonce Member Posts: 129
    Will the 2003 have a similar sunroof to the 2002. I may be the only person on earth who thinks this but it seems too big for me. Any ideas?
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    I believe it will be the same size, and again only on the XS Premium model.

    Bob
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    Just don't open it all the way! :)

    -mike
  • armac13armac13 Member Posts: 1,129
    I have an after-market moon roof, and I actually prefer it to the factory roof for 2 reasons. 1. The factory roof is very heavy and therefore raises the centre of gravity. I suspect (but I have no experience or data to confirm) that this increases body lean. 2. My roof both slides and *tilts* unlike the factory roof. In Vancouver we get a fair amount of rain and I can still use the tilt year around without danger of getting wet. On the other paw, I may just be rationalizing not having laid out the extra loonies to get the Limited (Canadian, eh).
    :-)

    Ross
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    I highly doubt the % weight that the roof is over the aftermarket makes any difference in the lean. The tilt I do miss on my Trooper roof which is a few inches bigger than the Forester one. But I guess with a roof that big you can't really have it tilt and seal properly.

    -mike
  • odd1odd1 Member Posts: 227
    I'm with you that moon roof has been way too super sized.
  • mrluthermrluther Member Posts: 23
    I have owned 4 subaru wagons since 1980 and every one of them has had a cel or egr warning light that behaves in an erratic fashion. My mechanic tired of hearing my pleas and told me to put a piece of black electrical tape over them. My 2002 Forester L MT had the cel go off in the first 1000 miles, it was due to the gas cap thing. It does take a while for the light to go off again. Subaru cars are unique and quirky but they have proved to be very reliable in my experience. Horizontally opposed engines are great in my opinion, just watch your idle speed!!! Mike
This discussion has been closed.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles