Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
2009 Subaru Forester
The 2009 Forester will be unveiled in Japan this Christmas and in the USA in January 2009. What will happen with the Forester 2008? Will the Forester 2008 and the Forester 2009 be sold during the year 2008? I think that it has never been a Forester 2008 just the Forester 2007 sold in 2008. Are there any comments on this? The 2009 Forester is another animal completely. It will compete with the RAV4, CR-V, and Outlander. So when the 2009 Forester will be sold in the USA?
Tagged:
0
Comments
An Audi Q7 by comparison showed half the deformation.
Ironically, it was a Land Rover dealer that pointed me to that site, and those results where what killed whatever interest I had in it.
Unfortunately Euro testing has only one older Subaru in its listings.
Thank you for your recent e-mail to Subaru of America, Inc. We appreciate you taking the time to contact us. At this time we are not aware of any plans to offer air filter or exhaust SPC enhancements for the 2009 Forester.
Looks like if you want SPC, you buy the Imprezas.
-mike
http://www.subaru.jp/forester/forester/index.html (click on the lower left button with a car symbol to get details).
Bob
Wonder if they'll offer that stain-proof material with the orange stitching.
Back seat looks nice and high up off the floor as opposed to too low to the floor like most Subaru passenger seats as of late.
Comments from the photos:
* love the perforations in the center sections of the leather seats
* love that rear cup holder/fold out thing, perfect to keep the kids happy
* headlamp washer are neat, but overkill (?)
* only 1 sunglass compartment. Old one had one, then two.
* rear seats recline
Nothing here to turn me away from it, still looks very promising. Hope it drives well.
As far as the headlamp washers are concerned, for those of us who live in the cold north with a lot of salt and grime in winter, they would be a great addition. A lot of higher-end European cars have them, as do many JDM cars. They do work nicely.
-mike
(1)- approach angle
(2)- departure angle
(3)- turning circle
(4)- ground clearance
(5)- skid plates?
(6)- front/rear vented discs?
(7)- xenon?
(8)- repeater/mirror signal lights?
(9)- main options?
(10)- 4 or 5 or 6 automatic?
(11)- steering wheel controls?
(12)- 4-cyl 2.0 or 4-cyl 2.5 or turbo?
(13)- EPA mileage estimates
(14)- etc
The RAV4 4-cyl 4/auto (Toyota)
The Santa Fe V6 4/auto (Hyundai)
The Outlander 4-cyl CVT/auto (Mitsubishi)
The CR-V 4-cyl 5/auto (Honda), and
The 2009 Forester 4-cyl 4/auto (Subaru)
From the above the CR-V or the Outlander could be the winner because of the up-to-date technology. However the Forester provides better off-road items, e.g. center differential (mechanical), limited slip differential front, limited slip differential rear, limited slip differential center. I will feel much safe driving a Forester than the other ones. Another factor is the petrol consume of these vehicles and prices.
Equally, from the photos the Forester (Japan) does not come with a rail roof and I think this is a disadvantage. I personally like my SUV has a rail roof so when the situation arise I could order a cross rail and therefore be able to load several items on it.
An article from Nikkei:
http://techon.nikkeibp.co.jp/english/NEWS_EN/20071226/144778/ (see pics at the bottom of the article)
Nikkei also has an article on the U.S.-spec Forester, but it is in Japanese only, and I am too lazy to translate. Once Nikkei translates the article into English, I will post the link.
http://www.fhi.co.jp/english/contents/pdf_en_41793.pdf
Some of the specs are translated from the metric and commented upon below:
Interesting information from Forester Press release with comments:
110mm Taller = 4 1/3 inches higher. Harder to remove snow from roof? How does it affect center of gravity and handling?
45 mm wider = 1 ¾ inches wider. Seems reasonable.
0.1 meter = 3.7 inches smaller turning radius “for zippy handling.” Great press release writers.
120 volt ( and 12 volt) power outlet in hatch area of Japanese version at least.
Large center console compartment that can hold small notebook computer Approximately 8 ¼ x 11 ½ inches.
Styling (reprinted without comment): “Streamlined, yet sculpted styling evokes images of powerful, well defined muscles carved out of stone. “
Power train information given is NOT for North American models.
Fuel efficiency information as quoted elsewhere is for Japanese domestic models using the 2.0 litre engine.
Wow that's good news and impressive too given that they increased the WB by 4 inches.
Also noticed that they added a telescopic steering wheel and pneumatic hood supports
I'm skeptical on whether the HIDs and washers make it across the pond. On and no turn signals in the side mirrors?
-Frank
Telescoping wheel is good because I feel like my wife sits too close to the steering wheels some times. You're supposed to have 12" space there, I believe.
Clearance has been stated at up to 8.9". My guess is the XT model will have a bit less, but still over 8". Still, that's best in class.
4EAT for the auto tranny. This is the only significant "miss" in my opinion.
As for the competition, all those listed and a few more. Forester may stand out with fuel economy (base models) and performance (XT models).
I wish the options for this new Forester could be fully independent without being pre-conditioned with other ones. For example an option should be for the navigation system, an option for the xenon/HID lights, an option for the moonroof, an option to upgrade the sound, and an option for the heated leather seats. Fog lights, repeaters or mirror sign lights, roof rails, leather-wrapped steering wheel and shift knob, privacy glass, heated driver and passenger mirrors, controls on the steering wheel, engine immobilizer, skid plates, and anti-theft alarm system should be standard and not an option. Equally, for example with the size of the wheels, an option should be offered to order the bigger size wheels that generally are mounted on the top of the vehicle range. For example in the Forester two wheels sizes are given the 215/65R16 and the 225/55R17. These wheels/tires are mutually interchanged without affecting the wheel speed sensor or TPMS and the vehicle suspension system. Moving from 215 to 225 affects the Speedo difference by 0.973% too fast and the diameter difference is 0.97%. Why do customers have to buy the top of the range vehicle just to have bigger wheels/tires?
The Borrego should be a lot bigger, and would probably compete with the Tribeca.
I agree with dstew that a company as small as Subaru has to standardize option packages in order to gain economies of scale.
Even Toyota, with all its volume, still forces you into packages.
For instance, to get AWD, you must get run flat tires. To get a GPS Navigation unit, or worse, a backup camera, which is a safety option, you have to get leather on a Sienna. Why? What does leather have to do with any of those? To get a DVD player, you're forced in to the premium sound system.
Also, even though lots of options appear to be a-la-carte on the menu, they just don't build them that way. You get what they make, unless you special order, and some regions even limit what you can special order, believe it or not.
So it's not just Subaru.
Even your abbreviated list of standard features would be unacceptable or unnecessary for some. For folks who are barely able to afford a Forester, those features may put it out of reach, or force Subaru to list a higher "base model" price than a more bare-bones competitor, thus losing the shopper looking for the cheapest price to get into a small, reliable SUV. Skid plates would be unnecessary cost & weight for the majority who never take their Forester off pavement. Folks who live in warm climates would probably not use or want to pay for heated mirrors. Roof rails could be a bad item to XT owners who take their Foresters to the track or to folks who prefer the wagon look to the SUV look, since the rails increase wind noise, weight and center of gravity while decreasing aerodynamics. Many people don't like tinted privacy glass (and I'd rather have it done aftermarket so it can be whatever color & level of tint I prefer). Leather-wrapped steering & shift knob? Many would rather spend that money on mudguards, cargo nets, all-weather mats, etc.
That said, I'd like everything on your list (except the privacy glass) on my Forester. My only point is that it's too hard to please everybody and too expensive to make everything a stand-alone option. No package they offer will be perfect for everyone.
I'd like to see leather, the giant moonroof, HID and audio systems each be standalone options regardless of trim level... and package them all together at a discount for someone who wants them all.
Expect an engine immobilizer to be standard equipment. It now is on all other Subies.
You can order larger wheels from your dealer's parts dept. Lots of folks prefer the smaller wheels for driving in snow and they should be easy to get rid of on one of the enthusiast forums or maybe even to sell back to the dealer. Granted, it's extra work, but you can get what you want that way.
Tinted windows behind the B-pillar will be std on the 09 Foresters.
-mike
And some of us are being forced to pay for what we do not want. Either that, we have to forego what we really want.
I agree, and a BIG one it is, too. Given that Subaru's never been know for superlative trannies, you'd think they'd jump at the chance to go with a 5 or 6 AT to make up for past lapses. Disappointing, especially from this mfr. No worry - my '03 will keep me going until the '10s come out with a better tranny and the other inevitable kinks worked out.
But overall, I like the clean lines of the redesign. Interior is nice and simple; let's hope some of that extra 3" translates into more driver's legroom, with a similar carryover for the new height. And what's that pod near the front of the hood in the photos? Surely not a reincarnation of the outboard tach, a la "The Judge!"
The question, of course, is "For which models?" Could the 4AT for Forester/Impreza be a transitional transmission until the new CVT is phased in?
Mr. Mori also mentioned that a new generation of horizontally-opposed engines would be introduced in 2010.
They did bling up the Mitsu though. So if you like flashy it may be for you.
-mike
RAV4, CR-V, and Rogue took the top 3 spots. Forester was not included, probably because the new one wasn't out yet.
They said the RAV4 had a 4EAT, is that right? I thought it was 5. Maybe they made a typo.
Any how, the funny thing was the 4 bangers beat the V6s, pretty much across the board.
Those are the competitors for the Forester. If you want to know what to expect, and what the targets should be for the Forester, read that article.
Test averages:
0-60mph: 9.1 seconds
1/4 mile: 17.0s @ 82mph
Top Speed: 111
dBA @ 70mph cruise: 70
MPG during test: 19
70-0 braking: 184 feet
Skidpad: 0.74 g
Lane Change: 56.7mph
There are your targets, basically. I think the Forester can beat most of those, and blow away that fuel economy.
The 4-cylinder RAV4 comes with 4AT, whereas the V-6 version uses 5AT.
The max payload capacity of any RAV4 is the equivalent of 7-persons weight (approximately 150 lbs each). So if you load your RAV4 with 7-persons the roof rail and the roof box are just decorations. Camping or picnic with 7-person is unpractical in a RAV4, i.e. no cargo for the usual stuff. Let’s us now see the Outlander (V6) where its payload capacity is enough to carry a total weight of 9-people (150 lbs each). This is to say 7-people as passengers and the weight equivalent of 2-people as cargo. The roof rail and roof box make sense here. This situation is much better with the Outlander ES 2.4L which its payload capacity is equivalent to 10-people weight. Making some allowances for the engine weight of both vehicles (RAV4 (V6) and Outlander (V6)) the Outlander has more than 80 lbs of meat (similar results for the 4-cyl). This weight difference in material of construction makes the Outlander stronger for carry more cargo than the RAV4, the CR-V and the Rogue. I think that the 2009 Forester will have the same limitation. Road test in the future should test the drivability of the vehicle with maximum payload capacity to find out if the vehicles still responds as expected.
In my research for a 7-seat SUV I was almost ready to order a RAV4 (V6 or a 4-cyl) but after going into the details of both vehicles plus some comments of RAV4’s owners about the poor payload capacity of the Toyota I am now more inclined to order an Outlander ES 2.4L. I am not in the business of towing anything (boat, motor home, etc) so at a price of MSRP $23,100 I think the Outlander ES 2.4L may suit my requirements. However I will wait for the new Forester to make my final decision.
The RAV4 and the CR-V are pavement SUV. The Rogue, Subaru and Outlander can be taken out of pavement, however the Outlander will allow you to carry not only people but plenty of cargo and that is what a proper SUV is for.
How safe could kids be with their heads mere inches from the rear glass?
Seriously, get a minivan if you need 7+ payload. It's the rational thing to do.
The Forester always had more payload than the CR-V or RAV4. When I shopped in 1998 the Subaru offered the most, followed by the CR-V, with the 760 lb rating of the Toyota bringing up the rear.
So the 4 banger RAV4 does have a 4 speed, interesting. Even more interesting is that it still won in C&D. The V6 is quite an engine (I have the same engine in my Sienna) so I'm not surprised it won the Edmunds comparo, even though apart from the powertrain I do not think it's the best in class.
Good luck in finding something that will suit your needs, I doubt there is something out there for you.
-mike
I don't think so but then again you can get an actual manual transmission in the Forester
-Frank
Happy New Year all!
-mike
-mike
The new model appears to have an even wider cargo area. The cargo floor was already fairly long, and tall as well, due to the squared off tailgate.
Sienna comes in an AWD model that's even an inch higher than the FWD models, outruns a Highlander with the same engine for the same fuel economy.
That's a different size class, though, so it won't match the Forester's fuel economy.
Can't wait til the 09 Foresters get here.