Howdy, Stranger!

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





2014 Subaru Forester

15791011

Comments

  • seven_upsseven_ups Posts: 10
    Rose920,

    Any polarized set of sunglass lenses will make it difficult to read the Subaru display, as polarized lenses are incompatible with LCD displays. Indeed, polarized lenses are not authorized for flying - so keep them out of Subaru and Gulfstream cockpits alike. Wayfarers or original Ray-Ban Aviators will do just fine.
  • garry21garry21 Posts: 1
    We have the same speedometer trouble with our 2013 Forester 2.0D in Australia.

    Dark cloudy weather, driving through forest on a sunny day, fog, built up areas with high rise buildings - at night, just about everywhere the speedometer is either difficult to read or can't be read at all.

    Subaru Australia have pulled the shutters down on this. My complaint has obviously hit a raw nerve. The Australian standards for speedometers are advisory, not mandatory but the matter could be pursued under the common law - not suitable for the purpose, insufficient opportunity to test the product before purchase, withholding important information, misleading conduct etc.

    Are you any further ahead?

    Garry 21
  • jmf100jmf100 Posts: 1
    I am looking at purchasing a 2014 Forester Limited and have a question on the gray leather. The color seems to be a light shade of gray. My question is whether the light color will wear well?....does it show wear and tear like scratches, etc. easily because of the light color?....will I be happy with the gray leather or should I choose one that comes with the black leather interior?
  • kurtamaxxxguykurtamaxxxguy Posts: 1,740
    As a reference point, my '09 Forester XT's gray leather seats did, after around 45000 miles, began to show small dark gray/black wear lines in the drivers seat. It wasn't dirt or grime - cleaning didn't restore the leather's uniform gray color.

    Have any Forester owners with black leather seats noted any light cracks or other wear features over time? Mine are too new to show anything just yet.
  • laszlo9laszlo9 Posts: 36
    edited August 2013
    I actually bought 2 new 2014 Subaru Forester XT's. Unfortunately the first was totaled after not even 3 weeks. Because of the construction of it next day went back to the dealer and ordered another one

    Regards

    Laszlo Kovacs
  • Do you realize that Forester's steering wheel is not parallel to the car front? The left side of steering wheel is 1 inch further away from the center of driver's seat than the right side of the steering wheel. Also, the center of car seat does not line up with the center of steering wheel and the center of the meter panel. It is also 1 inch off.

    I love the performance of forester. However, very disappointed about these alignment mistakes that should not happen to Forester!

    The new Subaru logo plate is not as good looking as 2012/2013's model.
  • laszlo9laszlo9 Posts: 36
    That is very odd. I do like the performance of the XT but still think the CVT is not the right transmission for it. For the 2.5 yes but the XT's turbo engine is really being held back by it.
  • saedavesaedave Chicago, ILPosts: 685
    Have you tried S# wide open throttle? Way faster than my previous 2010 XT leaving the toll booths to merge with traffic! And much faster than my 2005 6 cylinder without the excessive noise of either.

    Perhaps we'll see some road test numbers soon that will confirm the seat-of- the-pants feel.
  • Hi,
    I recently purchased a 2014 Forester XT Touring model. On the dash, just to the right of the speedometer, there is a button called Select, its a push button similar to the Trip button on the left side of odometer.

    My question is about the functionality of the Select button, apparently it does nothing in my Forester. From reading the owner's manual, it seems like the Select button is deactivated in models that have the multi function display and its only active if you have the standard information display.

    Is my reading of the owner's manual correct that the Select button does nothing in my Forester Touring model? Appreciate if anybody else can confirm if my understanding here is correct that the Select button is basically a useless button in the Forester Touring model.

    Thanks!!!
  • When the sales was doing a walk through of my 2.0XT Touring, he specifically mentioned about this. He said the speedometer module is made the same for all Forester trims, and some of the lower end trims do not have the "info" button on the steering wheel, so the "select" button is the only way to control the multi function display. But for touring trim, that "info" button on the steering wheel replaces that select button, but since it's the same speedometer, they are not making new design/parts just to take out that button, so it's just a left over thing there.
  • Our local Subaru dealer, so far, has had two '14 XT's. I'm driving one, the other was traded to another dealer.

    Does anyone here know what percentage of '14 Foresters are XT's? They seem to be rarer this time out.
    Also interesting that Consumers Reports remarked they don't plan to fully test the XT this time around :confuse: (they've driven it but have said little other than it "requires" premium fuel (wrong: premium is recommended, not required).
  • I have one and I think they are testing the waters with the CVT without any other option and that is why they are kind of scarce. I find the CVT is a mediocre transmission for that engine. It does not give justice to the rest of the car. I would not be surpriced if by next year it will be changed to a maybe dual clutch system or something like that. Personally I use premium fuel only. Don't forget the engine is a high performance sTi engine that needs high octane fuel without ethanol. You can put regular in the tank of a Ferrari as well and could drive with it. Would you do it? And if not why? So that applies to this engine as well. If you really want to use regular you should reset the timing to accommodate the the different level of detonation or you will pay some serious figure for an engine job down the line.
  • saedavesaedave Chicago, ILPosts: 685
    "I find the CVT is a mediocre transmission for that engine. It does not give justice to the rest of the car. I would not be surpriced if by next year it will be changed to a maybe dual clutch system or something like that."

    I also have a 14 XT and do not agree. I would not be surprised to see the turbo 2.0 replace the six in the Outback and Legacy. When driven with a very light foot the economy is quite good....and the problematic five speed automatic in the six could be retired along with that engine.

    OTOH the economy when using the available performance is middling at best. I only have about 1,000 miles on mine so fuel economy is not yet at max. My previous 2010 XT took 5,000 miles to reach its max economy. My 2014 XT currently gets about 27 mpg at 70-75 mph.
  • We will see what the fututre will bring. Who will be right. I have about 4000ML on mine and yes in I drive it runs about 2100 RPM at 75Ml. You can barely hear it.
    There is one problem that I found in these blogs. The fact that people talking about economy with a 250 HP turbocharged racing engine. This is NOT an engine for economy but a performance motor that is replacing the WRX engine.
    Why would you want to buy this car with economy in mind. Get the non turbo with the CVT. They match perfectly and you will have a great car with great economy. If you don't intend to drive it in the Sport modes than what is the point to have one. But watch if you press the Sport or the Sport Sharp it will drink fuel like a drunken sailor. Also there is where the CVT sucks.
    Driving WRX for more than 6 years I know what I was expecting from a Subaru Turbo and it is NOT that.
  • We will see what the fututre will bring. Who will be right. I have about 4000ML on mine and yes in I drive it runs about 2100 RPM at 75Ml. You can barely hear it.
    There is one problem that I found in these blogs. The fact that people talking about economy with a 250 HP turbocharged racing engine. This is NOT an engine for economy but a performance motor that is replacing the WRX engine.
    Why would you want to buy this car with economy in mind. Get the non turbo with the CVT. They match perfectly and you will have a great car with great economy, if you don't intend to drive it in the Sport modes than what is the point to have one. But watch if you press the Sport or the Sport Sharp it will drink fuel like a drunken sailor. Also there is where the CVT sucks because it tends to over rev, shifting becomes erratic and there is no clutch to solve the problem.
    Driving WRX for more than 6 years I know what I was expecting from a Subaru Turbo and it is NOT that.
  • saedavesaedave Chicago, ILPosts: 685
    Remember I traded a previous turbo Forester for the new one. Economy was not my objective particularly with either one! However the 2014 seems to get about 25% better mpg than the 2010 and with far less noise and vibration. For CAFE reasons, that is important for Subaru if not for you and me. I see the XT as a lower insurance rate WRX wagon with better outward vision.

    The only downside from the update is a firmer ride which is balanced by better high speed handling.

    If the XT turbo had not been offered this year I probably would have purchased an RDX. The Premium XT's pricing was enough lower than the RDX to convince me to buy. The Touring XT would have lost to the RDX. I doubt that the loads of garbage accessories on the Touring will hold their value at trade-in time. Of course an RDX is likely to depreciate more than the XT Premium.
  • Comparing my '14 XT to former '09 XT, the 14's more responsive (particularly in sport mode - in sport# mode it gets confused), yet still manages to get the same or a little better fuel economy.

    Granted, if you want max. mileage out of a Forester, the '14 2.5 engine will give you better fuel economy with slightly better acceleration. Also, that's the only version you can get the new 6 speed manual on, though you'll burn more gas with that one.

    My only worry is, being a direct injection engine, it may suffer from carbon buildup.
  • saedavesaedave Chicago, ILPosts: 685
    "the 14's more responsive (particularly in sport mode - in sport# mode it gets confused), yet still manages to get the same or a little better fuel economy."

    A little better fuel economy surprises me. I'll have to try that and see if I get the same result.
  • zombiebombiezombiebombie Posts: 10
    edited September 2013
    I am looking at a 2014 Forester 2.5i Premium with Manual Transmission and the All Weather Package. Are there any other must have options/accessories any current owners would recommend that are really good to have, but difficult to install afterwards? As I meet the dealer this weekend, I would like to get additional accessories bundled if they don't back down on price much.
  • I need to disagree with your speculation that a 2014 Forester 6 speed will "burn more gas" than the CVT. I purchased my 6 speed Premium in late July and have 1700+ miles on it. My best highway MPG (in the Colorado mountains--primarily on Slumgullion Pass between Gunnison and Creede, and then between Creede and Denver-- has been 38.4! Not a fluke. I've driven the pass three times now. Denver to Gunnison? 36+ mpg. And the 6 speed has plenty of pep and acceleration. (*I* have no idea who would want a turbo...seems like a waste of money and fuel.) So please don't speculate on subjects not tested. I will be posting my own review soon.
  • I only have about 1700 miles on my 2014 Forester Premium manual 6 speed, so my opinion may still change, but here are the accessories I have and I see no need for others at this point: Back bumper cover, splash guards, all-weather floor mats, and locking wheel nuts. These were already on the car; the salesman was not responsive when I told him we really didn't need the floor mats (which I could have purchased a nice set for half the Subaru cost) and the locking nuts (we live in rural Colorado--really not needed.) The bumper cover and the splash guards are a MUST. With the heavily-tinted rear windows, I've not seen a big need for an auto-dimming rear view mirror. Just IMHO. Overall, I love my new Forester. The 6 speed transmission is getting an easy 35 mpg on the highway (not the interstate, the highway) and about 26 around town. The pattern is a little hard to get used to, as it's fairly tight, but I'm getting better. Make sure you're OK with the driver's seat--the lumbar support is pronounced, even at completely deflated. I love the turning radius and the great cornering in our Colorado mountain passes. The all-weather package (i.e. heated seats, etc.) comes standard with the manual transmission version, so don't let them charge you extra. I don't miss the sun roof--I've always thought snow and sun roofs don't mix. 'Hope this helps.
  • I don't think the light gray interior is very practical in a Forester. I found some inexpensive black covers on the internet (that allow for the side airbags) that I placed over my cloth seats, but if you've put out for leather seats that would not be something you would want to do.
  • kurtamaxxxguykurtamaxxxguy Posts: 1,740
    edited September 2013
    Nice that your MPG's far better than Subaru claims!

    Subaru says their 2.5 CVT has better MPG (27 mpg combined) than their 6 speed manual (24 mpg combined).
    Of course, depending on driver, trip type and fuel quality, MPG will differ.

    I've no personal experience for 2.5 MPG's as I drive the XT, which given the mix of short and long trips I have, gets 24 - 25 MPG mixed (Subaru claims 23 MPG mixed). Reason for turbo, IMHO, is quicker vehicle response when passing or otherwise (I've driven 2.5i and found it a little slow in coping with our Portland OR traffic), and quieter CVT operation (turbo CVT has new belt design).
  • wow! You high mpg folks have my attention. I need to take another look at the Forester, I dismissed it because it outgrew my idea of what the Forester should be (gen 1&2 sized).

    John
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    CR got 26mpg in theirs, which is best in class. It matched the old Escape hybrid.

    IIRC our 2009 model got 22mpg in their tests, so a significant improvement for the CVT.

    Back then the manual got 24mpg, so it's anyone's guess as to whether or not it would beat the new CVT. The new engine is also more efficient so it should beat 24mpg, at least.
  • Thank you colocate. I didn't realize that the all weather pkg comes standard on manual. The dealer is asking for $21,561+Doc. fee+plate transfer fee+Sales tax.

    I am thinking about adding body side moldings, bumper corner molding kit, rear bumper cover, splash guards, auto-dimming mirror with compass and homelink and rear cargo tray.
  • I agree that the Forester has "outgrown...what the Forester should be..." In my opinion it's a BIG vehicle. (I drove a little '77 Honda Accord for 30 years.) But IMHO it's nimble for its size and gets great gas mileage. Caveat: I DRIVE CONSERVATIVELY, with MPG in mind, pushing it only when I need to. (Saving the planet for your grandkids.) The real-time mpg display is addicting.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    That begs the question - is there room for a mini-Forester now?

    Crosstrek isn't quite the same, even though passenger space is really good, cargo space doesn't match the early Foresters. It needs to be boxy and practical.
  • YES! (Whatever happened to the GL? To the Justy?) Just as there is room for a SMALL pickup truck! We have a little 1994 Toyota pickup--nowadays the smallest pickup truck you can buy is huge. Americans always want bigger and more loaded vehicles...I guess as long as there are folks out there (like me...what can I say?) who are willing to buy a big ol' Forester, the manufacturers won't be interested in going back to small. It will take a crisis, I'm afraid, on the macro-level.
  • Seems XV Crosstrek is the baby brother of the Forester. Their interior and usability are remarkably similar, though Forester is more refined wrt interior noise and ride.
    Perhaps if sliding rear seat were added to Crosstrek, that would give it more flexibility wrt interior space.
Sign In or Register to comment.