2008 Forester; Reliability/Longevity of X vs. XT

monikersuprememonikersupreme Member Posts: 1
edited April 2014 in Subaru
I am currently shopping for a used 2008 Forester via dealer auction. While I'm a pretty conventional "suburban commuter" driver I was thinking about treating myself to an XT. My commute isn't extensive, so losing a bit of mpg is acceptable to me, however, I'm concerned about the longevity of the XT...

Assuming proper maintenance + 91 octane, should the XTs as reliable as the Xs?

I've done the usual scouring of reviews on the web and the reliability reports for the 2008 Foresters in general (ex. ConsumerReports, NADA) are positive overall, however, most of these reviews focus on the X (and not the XT turbo) models.

I'm pretty disciplined about maintaining my cars but I do want something that I can drive for at least 100k miles before having to worry about a replacement.

Any advice/opinions would be much appreciated...



  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Either one should give you 100k miles. Subaru hasn't really had that many gasket issues since about 2003 or so.

    I'd still pick the non-turbo for longevity, though. The turbo itself can fail, plus the whole engine is more stressed when it's making more power.
  • aathertonaatherton Member Posts: 617
    I would be careful about buying a used XT. In mid-2008 Subaru came out with a recommendation that the oil change interval for the XT must be changed to 3,750 miles, twice as often as the requirement for the X. This is because of turbo heat cooking the oil, bearings and seals.

    Many XT owners may have not known of or ignored the recommendation. And XT owners tend to use their power, stressing the engine and whichever drivetrain they have. Turbo failure does occur, and it is often the first item that goes. If you want a used car that is good for 100K miles, an XT is not a car that comes to mind.
This discussion has been closed.