Subaru Forester (up to 2005)

bsvoller · June 2002

I left that off of my earlier post, but I did add the OEM oil cooler to my Forester, as I have the stick.

Bought it from Teague's Auto, all the parts, Dale was prompt and knowledgable. Good experience.

Installation was a breeze, partly because the oil filter is so accessable. I would recommend this mod before all others for anyone that's planning on "heavier" duty use.

Since we sprang for the gauge pack a few months back, we now have the ability to monitor the engine oil temp directly, and it stays in a very narrow range between about 80 C and 95 C (~176 and 203 F) with the oil cooler, even on very hot days towing in the hills, in traffic (return leg of our recent trip to the Black Hills, SD).

rsholland · June 2002

<< Did you guys notice the lateral Gs, though? 0.77, with the nearest competitor at a distant 0.71. Those 16" rims and tires make a world of difference. >>

The wider track also plays a big part. I think the track is roughly .75" wider than last year's model.

Bob

paisan · June 2002

The subie ATs are pretty beefy units. (they are similar to old-time MPVs and Pathfinders) so I don't suspect that to be an issue.

The MTs on the other hand haven't been changed since the 70hp carburated 1.8l engines of the 80s on the subies. (except for the 22b, STI 6MT, etc)

-mike

casecom2 · June 2002

Not yet; hopefully sometime in the next couple of weeks ... I'll post back afterward.

Did I ever mention how my car-buying process is a long and agonizing one?

ateixeira · June 2002

Brian: how much for the kit, delivered, just out of curiosity.

I'd install it at the first sign of gellation/sludge. In fact if you have a Toyota affected by that issue I'd recommend one.

Casey: I'm even worse, it takes me years to choose the right vehicle, and a dozen or more test drives.

-juice

bsvoller · June 2002

-juice; I can't find my correspondance with Teague's anymore, but if memory serves, the OEM oil cooler was a bit over $300. About $100 less than the dealer wanted. The expensive part is the heat exchanger, understandably so...

-brianV

bsvoller · June 2002

-mike: You say the MT is an unchanged unit from a 100 years ago (roughly

). What's your source on this ?

According to the Subaru factory parts specifier, the MT is brand new for '03.

If the AT were up to the task, I think they would've bumped the tow rating for both units on the '03. It doesn't make sense to have the MT rated higher than the AT. The new CRV jumped 1000#'s to 2500#'s now. I think that's why Subaru responded.

-brianV

paisan · June 2002

But up to and includeing the WRX transmission, the MTs have been the same from the 80s. I have heard this from several un-related subaru experts. They have beefed up the gears but only slightly over the years. As for '03 I don't know if it's the same or different but my guess is that it's probably the same, until we get the 6MT in the STI and possibly across the board. The Clutch and pressure plate have changed over times as well as it's changed from manual clutch to hydrolic, but the gears and the case haven't changed.

-mike

ateixeira · June 2002

Subaru seems to use gradual improvement rather than complete replacement, so the tranny may indeed be loosely based on the older ones.

C&D says ratios for 1st and 2nd have changed, but the rest are the same, as is the final drive ratio.

Either way, the weakest link in the powertrain is the clutch, and that is by design. Ever heard of complete AWD system failure? No? Exactly. A clutch costs a couple hundred bucks, a tranny is a couple thousand.

Bob will correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the CR-V is rated for 1500 lbs, though with no trailer brake restriction.

FWIW, UK Subies are rated to tow 1800 kg even without trailer brakes, or 3960 lbs. Subies have also won multiple trailering awards in that country, including the new H6s.

So that's why I agree with paisan on this one - the US rating has more to do with lawyers than engineers.

-juice

varmint · June 2002

Juice - You are correct. In the NA market, the CR-V is rated for 1500lbs (both trannies). Like the Forester, it's rated higher in other countries. I forget what the AT is rated for, but the MT is around 2,500lbs.

ateixeira · June 2002

I think Bob mentioned the Pilot needs trailer brakes for anything over 1000 lbs. If that is so, it means the CR-V can tow more without brakes! Pretty funny.

-juice

rsholland · June 2002

Juice, funny you mention that, I was thinking the same thing.

That 1000 pound trailer brake restriction is in the Pilot owners manual. I haven't seen the CRV owners manual, so I don't know if there is a trailer brake restriction or not. I find if hard to believe that the CRV wouldn't have that restriction, and the Pilot does.

Bob

73soob01 · June 2002

David,

I use a Garmin GPS III, and usually have the moving map displayed. Problem is, I can't see lat/lon coordinates unless I switch to another page, and the font is too small to read while driving. Darn these bifocals....

So, when I'm off the beaten path and need to keep track of lat/lon, I have a Magellan GPS 2000 set to show the lat/lon in nice large font.

But since the Garmin map doesn't show many of the old roads I use, I also carry hard-copy maps and aerial photos in the pax seat for reference. :-)

I do have a third GPS unit, a DeLorme, but I only use that one if I'm traveling with the laptop computer -- something I avoid because the laptop isn't quite as rugged as the Forester when it comes to bouncing over ruts and curbs. ;-)

(And yes, friends and family do consider me eccentric -- and not only because I drive a Subaru!)

:-))

Scott

bsvoller · June 2002

-juice, mike

Thanks for the clarification. I bet the change in the gear ratios is what prompted the "all new" label from the parts specialist. I'm inclined to agree that the MT has been evolving over time, rather than experiencing a complete redesign.

FWIW, I specifically asked if the new '03 pressure plate and clutch disk would fit an '01 and was told "No". They might have been leading me around by the nose, but I didn't get that sense at all. I think they may have changed the number of splines.

As to the CRV tow rating, I'm certain the new model is rated to 2500#, but I can't remember where I saw that. I think it was CR. The old one was rated to 1500#.

bsvoller · June 2002

Woops. I stand corrected. Quick jaunt over to hondacars.com confirms that the CRV is only rated to 1500 lbs. Must be getting old...

Sorry for the confusion.

-brianV

varmint · June 2002

Brian - No problem. In other markets the CR-V is rated for about 2,500 lbs. You may have seen that posted somewhere and not realized they were talking about another country. No biggie.

joe_sin · June 2002

Although I'm sure that lawyers (specifically the ones employed by insurance companies) have a lot to do with the over 1000lb trailer brake requirement in NY and elsewhere, imagine the following scenario...

I have this vision of driving up a very steep hill in the rain with a 2000 lb trailer on the Forester. I make it over the top of the hill. Now I'm going DOWN the very steep hill in the rain (or is it snow? sleet?) with 2000 lbs of uncontrolled weight behind me. I step on the brakes (hard? gentle? might not matter...), and the trailer starts to fishtail out from behind. Think quick.

If it were all about dry, flat roads, it probably would never matter. I found myself on Long Island today (known for it's flatness) and still found myself in a 45 degree local street.

bsvoller · June 2002

Joe, you're referring to an unbraked trailer I presume ? I've expressed the same concern, given that I live in Denver, and 15 mile long 7% grades are common around here. There's nothing like watching all the newbies ride their brakes downhill for 10 minutes at a time to put the fear of God in you.

In fact, my brother-in-law had a brand new car totaled once by someone who burned up her brakes coming down I-70 into Denver - took the next exit, ran a red light and hit him. He was lucky to walk away.

Although I can understand some members of this board, having reasonable concerns about the cost of class I trailers doubling when you add trailer brakes, in a lot of circumstances it just makes sense. Depends on where you live I guess and what the conditions are.

Trying to control a 2000# unbraked trailer with a short wheelbase 3200# car/wagon/suv in steep terrain or under windy/slippery conditions could get dangerous. I just don't like the proportions - the trailer weight is too large a percentage of the tow vehicle mass, and the wheelbase is too short to maintain leverage over the trailer's sway moment without trailer brakes.

Just my .02

rsholland · June 2002

I don't want to give the impression that I'm against trailer brakes. I'm not. In fact, if I had my way ALL trailers would be equipped with brakes.

My problem is the very limited availability of Class I trailers with brakes. As was just mentioned, it will increase the cost of these "inexpensive" trailers quite a bit, therefore no dealer will equip their trailers with brakes because they will become prohibitively expensive. The only way you're going to see trailer brakes on Class I trailers, is if they're required by lawwhich is unlikely.

Bob

ateixeira · June 2002

joe: but you brought up a scenario where the Forester would carry a significant advantage.

Why? Under engine braking, all four tires would help keep speed under control, not just the front two. And this is really what you would need to do on a long down hill, else you'd bake your brakes no matter what you are driving (see Brian's post for an example).

Also, with all four tires providing engine braking, that divides the chore by four instead of two, so again you are less likely to skid.

In reality the ideal setup would be engine braking plus stability control, so you'd get assistance from the brakes only when needed, not all the time. This may be why the VDC wins towing awards in the UK.

I've towed maybe 1500 lbs behind the Forester, but I can't recall any long/steep hills except for a few short ones near my house. I just drive like a granny, taking it easy, allowing huge following distances and just driving smoothly. I've never towed in rain or snow, however.

-juice

paisan · June 2002

Nothing like cruising along at 70mph with a tandem-axle auto-hauler behind you weighing 5500lbs in the rain! Keep both hands on the wheel son!

-mike

bsvoller · June 2002

-juice Your point on having all 4 wheels contribute with engine braking is well-taken. I have had the Forester out on those long grades, and as I've mentioned before, it delivers as advertised extra-ordinarily well. Engine braking is surprisingly strong, third gear will hold even extreme grades (8%) under 55. A touch to the brakes to set up the corners every now and again is all I've ever needed.

Do you think AWD may contribute to stability in strong cross-winds too?

ateixeira · June 2002

I love this explanation here:

http://4x4abc.com/4WD101/need.html

With 4 wheel traction full-time you simply have a higher bank account of available traction. The example explains this concept very well. Rain, snow, and cross winds are when this extra traction is needed most.

-juice

paisan · June 2002

It definitely helps. I've tried my Trooper in 2wd and AWD and when in AWD it is much more stable in all conditions.

-mike

ateixeira · June 2002

Heck, I have practical experience that proves the point.

Our FWD 626 was poor in the snow, mostly because it had lots of torque and an open front diffy. The front wheels would spin easily. It would also understeer even in the dry. Basically, the front wheels were being burdened with all the steering, all the acceleration, 90% of the braking, and 60% of the weight of the car. Tire wear was obviously much worse in the front.

My Miata (RWD) will spin if you so much as lift the throttle in a corner. It takes getting used to. Fun, though. But still, it's the driven wheels that tend to skid first. It's tuned for neutral handling, not under/over steer, but the throttle definitely can make it change directions.

My Subie carries neither vice.

-juice

terry4848 · June 2002

I'm planning a trip that will take me through the mountains of the blue ridge out east here on my way to Minnesota from Virginia. I have a new 2002 Forester automatic and would like some tips on how to drive the grades. I've made this trip many times with other cars and there were always problems with my Voyager, downshifting and using cruise. Should I avoid cruise altogether? Also give me some tips on the BEST tire pressure for mileage and comfort. Thanks- Also what have you longtime owners found to keep your Foresters lasting a long time besides frequent oil changes and regular maintanence.

bsvoller · June 2002

Well, what'aya know... CNN is reporting today that the NHTSA has published a new towing guide available at

http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/problems/Equipment/towing/index.htm

Apparently, the number of accidents involving towed vehicles is on the rise, as is the number of people towing various kinds of rigs.

So how do you make a link a link, anyway ?

ateixeira · June 2002

You're talking about 3000 foot elevations in most places, nothing compared to what you'd see in Colorado, so don't sweat it too much.

Your auto should shift itself even if you use cruise, so you could, but I wouldn't. If you feel like the tranny is guessing (actually, learning the terrain), then disable cruise and add some throttle as you approach hills to get a head start.

Coming down a steep grade, you may want to use "3" to lock out overdrive for some engine braking. Just avoid riding the brakes, which could cause fade.

On those smallish mountains, I've found that usually just letting off the throttle is enough to maintain your speed. I have a manual though, and would some times use 4th on steep descents.

It's a nice drive. Pack a picnic and plan a hike on the way, to stretch your legs. The views are nice. Catch a sunset - they are priceless.

-juice

bsvoller · June 2002

So I just read the new guide mentioned above, nothing new here, but a solid overview for newbies.

By the way, apparently the new software will recogonasize a link and turn it into a link for you without further todo. But hitting refresh still auto resubmits your last post... sigh.

stever · June 2002

This is the format I use when I want to post a link but "hide" the URL:

<a href="http://www.edmunds.com">Edmunds.com</a>

Steve
Host
SUVs, Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards

kate5000 · June 2002

I've done 11-13K feet elevations in my Forester. Going up usually is not a problem: I easily left Tahoes and Explorers way behind. Going down (if a steep grade), you need to downshift manually, often to "3", sometimes to "2". It's a bad practice to ride on the brakes. Forester feels very stable, and AWD makes it easier to go fast on a windy road, so you need to exercise some caution, not to underestimate the tricky turns and twists.

Visit vista points, have a light lunch in a nice spot... take in the scenery as much as you can. Listen to a good music. To me, nothing beats a good Italian aria among magnificent peaks and canyons.

varmint · June 2002

Okay Steve. Now I have to ask you how you were able to post that example without it becoming a link? Do you Hosts have some anti-HTML superpower, or something?

stever · June 2002

lol, host Pat clued me in to that one, although I had to search my notes to remember it. Instead of typing the bracket, you use the ascii code ("& l t ;" without spaces) to type the bracket (at least I think that's how it works - I just cut and pasted it).

Steve
Host
SUVs, Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards

ateixeira · June 2002

And here I thought the hosts were all Jedi Knights using the Force... ;-)

-juice

darkwater71 · June 2002

I've had my '02 S+ Auto (not named; I'm not really the naming type) for about 6 weeks now and haven't really had any problems with it, except for having the A/C system drained & recharged when I found out (the hard way) that it wasn't full.

When I first posted after buying my Subie I mentioned that I'd be making a 1600 mi o/w drive "soon". Thanks to everyone who commented on how to drive during the break-in period. The trip hasn't occurred yet, but it looks like "soon" is going to be "soon", and I currently have 1600 mi on my car. Are there any benefits/risks to having the 3k oil change before/after I make my trip?

tidester · June 2002

Tossing in my tuppence:

The < symbol is "less than" and the embedded code for it is to use LT (less than!) preceded by the ampersand & and followed by the semicolon ;

So this is what you would actually type:

&LT;a href="http://www.edmunds.com">Edmunds&LT;/a>

to get

<a href="http://www.edmunds.com">Edmunds</a>

tidester
Host
SUVs; Aftermarket & Accessories

ateixeira · June 2002

Thanks, and may the Force be with you...

Doug: if you are going to be in the middle of that trip at 3000 miles, go ahead and change it before you head off. Subaru does not use a break in oil, so you don't have to wait until 3k for the first change.

In fact, I changed mine at 1k, and even now at 46k miles I'm routinely getting 24-27 mpg, so I must've done something right.

-juice

stever · June 2002

Now that I'm awake from my nap, I'm surprised that no one pointed out that my "ascii" code above was just some typing into html, and not related to all those nice § and ¶ symbols.

Meanwhile did everyone see the Road Test Follow Up: 2002 Subaru Forester S? We'll link on the left for newcomers to find.

Steve
Host
SUVs, Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards

mrluther · June 2002

Hello all! Does anyone have any opinions on the company Cobb Tuning? I was thinking of purchasing some engine and intake parts from them. My 2002 L 5sp now has 13,500 miles on it and the only change I have made is a K&N air filter. For $42 it was a good choice! I still get crappy clutch chatter from the car first thing in the morning but it has been a great change from my 87GL 2wd wagon ( I still miss that car though). Any opinions on intake and exhaust upgrades would be welcomed. Thanks..Mike

gened1 · June 2002

Steve in the article you linked to above it states the 2002 Forester has a 2.4 liter engine. So I guess an update to the update will be forthcoming!?
Gene

stever · June 2002

lol, I need to start including my link to the Feedback Form when I call attention to these reviews :-)

Seriously, please fill it out whenever you see incorrect info or typos so the editoral folks can fix it. Thanks!

Steve
Host
SUVs, Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards

kens · June 2002

Jeff,

It is indeed possible to swap just the front speakers while leaving in the OE tweeters. In fact, I put in some 3-way Sony Xplods in the front and they work well with the tweeters. The tweeters, in this case, add more directional sound rather than supplement the high end.

Ken

casecom2 · June 2002

Turns out that animal rights groups were angered by the Forester ad showing the rabbit being "set free," because domesticated animals can't survive in the wild.

Subaru says the ad was intended to depict a wild rabbit but is changing the ad anyway.

Link to Ad Age article

paisan · June 2002

I hate these PITA animal rights groups. They really need to get a life and look at what's important. ARRRGGGGGG. They are probably the same people in the "human rights" groups who feel that terrorists should be treated fairly when caught!

-mike

tidester · June 2002

PITA doesn't bother me quite as much as those who fall over themselves trying to placate them on trivial matters.

tidester
Host
SUVs; Aftermarket & Accessories

paisan · June 2002

PITA doesn't bother me quite as much as those who fall over themselves trying to placate them on trivial matters.

Similar to the Aztek, I don't blame the designers for an ugly vehicle, I blame the management who looked at it, checked it over, and then signed the papers saying "Yeah this is a great looking and great designed vehicle, let's produce it!"

-mike

kens · June 2002

Jeff,

Subaru Parts is good on price, but I've heard that they can be quite slow with delivery. They're just another Subaru dealer so you might want to call around locally and see what other dealers are willing to sell them to you.

Since my Forester came with the tweeters installed, I've never had the chance to really look at them. However, based on the other speakers, I'll bet they're made by Panasonic.

The front speakers on my 98 Forester are 6.5". I think they became smaller on later models. I purchased from Crutchfield and chose the "EZ Fit" models.

Yes, I have replaced my rear speakers as well. My rear speakers are 5" and I used Polk 501a.

Ken

ateixeira · June 2002

Engine Control Unit, Engine Control Module, same thing. Glad to hear that, BTW.

Cobb has a great reputation as far as I know.

The basic speakers are cheap dual cones, but the premium sounds gives you true two-ways in the front, so I'm sure aftermarket two-ways will work just fine.

LOL, mike. It's PETA, not PITA, but I'm sure you meant Pain In The @$$! Hilarious.

But if it's a wild cottontail, what's all the fuss about? Seems like the animal rights groups don't recognize their rabbits.

Try parts@libertysubaru.com for a better price, they were consistently cheaper when I asked for quotes.

-juice

paisan · June 2002

I meant PITA not PETA.

-mike

ateixeira · June 2002

I knew. :-)

-juice

Subaru Forester (up to 2005)

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles