We are aware of the login problems affecting the forums, and appreciate your patience as we work on a fix.
Did you recently purchase a new Tesla, Rivian or Lucid vehicle directly from the manufacturer and willing to share how your experience compared to previous vehicle purchases made through a traditional dealer? A reporter would like to speak with you; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 2/19 for details.
2010 Subaru Forester Changes

I love the 2009 Subaru Forester, but a few things missed the mark. Any word on whether these changes are likely/unlikely for 2010:
(1) iPod vs. SAT: If you get the NAV you have to choose either the Ipod Interface or the satellite radio. If you choose satellite radio you can't control the iPod though the steering wheel, the songs don't appear on the screen and so on. (I know you can PLAY the iPod through the AUX on the 2009, but I want BOTH iPod and satellite radio to be steering wheel controlled.)
(2) Back-Up Cam?
(3) Dual Climate Controls?
(4) Passenger 10-way seats?
THANKS FOR ANY ANSWERS!
(1) iPod vs. SAT: If you get the NAV you have to choose either the Ipod Interface or the satellite radio. If you choose satellite radio you can't control the iPod though the steering wheel, the songs don't appear on the screen and so on. (I know you can PLAY the iPod through the AUX on the 2009, but I want BOTH iPod and satellite radio to be steering wheel controlled.)
(2) Back-Up Cam?
(3) Dual Climate Controls?
(4) Passenger 10-way seats?
THANKS FOR ANY ANSWERS!
Tagged:
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Bob
I agree with you on the radio controls. Any more, iPod interface and satellite radio are becoming standards. It is ridiculous to make folks choose between the two.
I disagree. As a Forester owner who tows, a backup camera would be greatly appreciated. This feature makes it much easier to line up the tow hitch with the trailer.
Also, the new Forester's rear outward visibility is worse than that found on our '01 S Premium. Finally, as someone who is aging (about to turn 64), I've found it increasingly more difficult to back up any vehicle as time goes on. So I feel that anything that aids in this area is welcomed.
Bob
But, aside from that, the tool is just a crutch for incompetence. Sure, a backup camera would make it easier to line up a hitch with a trailer, but that is a long shot. Anyone who pulled a trailer regularly would (or should) be quite adept at lining it up.
Rattles are a perennial issue. I have yet to ride in a newer Subaru (2005+) that does not have them, yet most of the owners are completely unconcerned about the rattles, even when I point them out. Their response? Something along the lines of, "all vehicles rattle." I truly hope Subaru does something to address the problem of rattles, as the issue certainly plays heavily into perceived quality.
Seat comfort - as always, it is personal preference. I think Subaru seats are fantastic. Others find them too firm, insufficient lumbar support, etc. I find GM (SUV/truck anyway, I have not ridden in a modern GM car) seats uncomfortable, as they are too wide and have poor bolstering. They are cushy, no doubt, but the kind of cushy that makes me want to take a nap, not drive....
Oh, I don't know. I've been towing on and off for 12 years or so, and I still find it challenging lining up the trailer hitch with the trailer. Every write-up I've seen in which towing and a rear-view camera have been involved, the camera has drawn nothing but praise.
Would you say power steering is just a crutch for those with weak arms? I call it progress.
Bob
Many people (I kid you not) cannot reliably or safely back a vehicle, especially in technical situations, without an aid of some kind - forget about adding a trailer to the mix!
As for the trailer comment itself, I intended to mean "regularly" as including the word "frequently." I, too, tow "on and off," about that same length of time (~15 years), and yes, it is challenging to align the ball with the trailer. But, for something I do a couple times a year, the fact that I can line the thing up on or immediately after the first try should indicate that it is not overly difficult. The vast majority of owners will never tow. They, instead, would use a backup camera to see the proximity of their vehicle to objects directly behind them. If these same drivers had any clue as to the dimensions of their vehicle or the spatial relations involved therein, they would have no need for such a device (except, as you noted, in situations where being physically unable to adjust position in order to gauge such relations). My argument is that any driver *should* have mastery of such basic skills. Devices such as backup cameras (and proximity sensors) only serve to provide that driver with another excuse to not develop the skill.
I see your point of view - I truly do. I simply do not agree that it would be a valuable feature, nor would I want the added cost of it were I to shop for a Forester. Maybe it would be a dealer-added feature.
Oh, I don't know. I've been towing on and off for 12 years or so, and I still find it challenging lining up the trailer hitch with the trailer. Every write-up I've seen in which towing and a rear-view camera have been involved, the camera has drawn nothing but praise.
Would you say power steering is just a crutch for those with weak arms? I call it progress.
Bob
I'm going to have to agree with Bob here. I used to be one of those people who thought that backup sensors were stupid. I've had em on my Armada for 5 years and they are a big help. I only wish it had a camera. With just the sensors, I can get the back of my truck wedged into those rough parking spots in Manhattan w/o issue and without hitting the other car. I can get within 6" of the other car every time. I also use them for lining up the trailers that I tow and I've been towing for 20 years, a camera would only enhance the back-up proceedure. Currently for lining up a trailer I will drop the back seat of the Armada and open the hatch. But a Camera would be better.
-mike
Subaru Guru and Track Instructor
-mike
Subaru Guru and Track Instructor
Well, like I said, as long as it remains an optional feature. I suppose you are both right (although unsaid) - drivers now are terrible at backing without the camera, so it can't make them any worse with it there. It seems that most drivers are not disturbed by their lack of competence in this regard. God help us if they try to drive a car without one....
Now to that low passenger's seat. I'm 6'3" and I find the seat a little low. For my wife, the seat can be a deal breaker. The salesman tells me the seat was purposefully set low for safety concerns. Has anyone attempted to raise the passenger seat. Wish Subaru would hike it up a bit.
And lastly, the many reports from owners that the paint chips so easily. The RAV4 is also a consideration for my next purchase, and reading many of the RAV4 forum comments, it also is being complained about over the paint chipping. Is it the new painting regulations causing this or cutting corners by the manufacturer?
An interesting note that we hear so many complaints about "only" a four speed in the 2009 Forester. But the 2009 RAV4, 2.5L, also has a reworked transmission that Toyota chose to leave a four speed. You don't hear much about that.
It is my understanding that the Feds changed the regulations for paint for environmental reasons.
So many cars now have problems with thin paint and chipping.
Washington is always helping us.
Mercedes and Infiniti have developed a new paint that uses nano technology and self heals, avoids chips etc.
Kind Regards
This transmission issue is one thing that has bugged me for a couple of years now. I consider it to be sheer bloody-minded thinking on the part of some makers to only use 4 speed automatics on their 4 cylinder models, the ones that could really use more gears, but stick 5-or-6 speeds in their V6 engined versions, the ones that really could get by with only 3 speeds with their bags of HP and torque.
I have finally driven the 40 miles to my nearest Subaru dealer to see the new Forester and it looks nice and drives nice on the limited test loop available (no highway near the dealer) but the jump in revs and noise when the tranny downshifts to 3rd is still too great for my liking. And I would like to see the engine revs down around 2500 or so when cruising at 70 on a flat highway.
Still, the seats are much more comfortable than those in my 2005 Forester XS - no more of that sitting on a concrete camp stool feeling in my nether region..
Another thing... has anyone else noticed a problem reading the instruments when wearing polarized sunglasses on a bright day? I had that problem with my 2005 Forester and this new layout, while more colorful, is no better. There's a lot not to like about my current 2005 Chrysler T&C, but good old black numbers on a white background still can't be beat for easy reading - and the electroluminescent panel lighting of the T&C is also the best for night driving, in my opinion.
But at least the tinted rear glass in the new Forester doesn't create that irritating pattern when viewed through the aforementioned sunglasses that I got with my 2005. It was somewhat like the pattern one gets when scanning a halftone newspaper photo and not using the smoothing feature of Photoshop.
One last little nit - I consider the 17 inch alloy wheels to be just shy of butt-ugly! Not as bad as those on the XT models or the 19 inchers on the new Toyota Venza, but still bad enough. Five spokes just aren't enough on a bigger wheel; the 10-spoke wheels of my 2005 Forester XS were - along with the 9 spoke satin finish alloy wheels on my 2005 T&C - to be the best looking alloy wheels I have yet seen on any car.
Other things I'd like to see:
Improved interior materials; the 2009 simply seems chintzy.
A cup holder I'd feel comfortable putting hot coffee in.
A cargo cover that actually covers the cargo area (it seems that the salesman was right on this - that can only happen if the rear seats are reclined, again, see the moonroof).
Winter package w/o the moonroof.
I guess some things, like a bumper cover, could be added, but all in all, I was sort of waiting to see what improvements 2010 brought. Not happy with the competition, either, so maybe I'll hold on the 2002 a while longer (although really wanted to get some head and side air bags).
Bob
I would expect more significant changes to occur in the 2012 model year, as that's when the mid-life refresh is expected to happen. That's when I expect to see the CVT, and perhaps a new H4 engine as well.
Bob
-Frank
That is my stance as well, after reading the arguments presented by Bob and Mike. Along this line, I noticed just two days ago that my local Sam's Club is selling backup camera systems. I was in a hurry so I did not inspect them, but I wonder how well they would do in terms of integrating with the vehicle versus being a bulky, strap-on gadget.
My father's past few motorhomes have had backup cameras, and they were barely noticeable - tucked away into the body. The cameras are really nice on those beasts (~40'), but I have parallel-parked the 36' motorhome he once had that did not have a backup camera. I had about 12" of clearance on each end. :shades:
Bob
Like them or not, they save lives. I expect to see greater use of this technology in the future, maybe (oh horrors!) even government mandated.
Bob (playing devil's advocate)
-Frank (also playing devil's advocate)
I suspect that very few lives, in fact, would be saved. Why? Because it is not enough for the technology to be there, it has to be used. The primary reason for these deaths cited is likely due to inattention of the driver, not the fact that the driver could not see the ground immediately behind the rear bumper.
Again, though, if people feel it is helpful, by all means they should add it to their cars - at least it would mean that they would likely use the device. I am playing "better driving and more attention to it" advocate. :P
* raise the passenger seat an inch or two
* ROUND cup holders, cups are not square!
That's my list.
For models with a GPS they should include a backup cam only because at retail they cost $99, so it can't possibly cost much to add that, and it would help justify the steep option price for the GPS better.
The passenger seat definitely needs a height adjustment.
Bill
I 'm not sure how high you would like to cover, but maybe darker window tint would be a solution?
Buy the bumper cover online and install it yourself. It just has double stick adhesive on the back.
Good Luck.
All your accessories can be ordered online.
My wife puts tissues on the back half and pens and other miscellaneous stuff in the front.
How 'bout one that pops out of the dash, then?
My 1998 Forester had more storage space than the 2009s. Just one cup holder, but the 2000 models got a dual and it was interchangeable, so I swapped it out for one of those.
As told by the salesman, the cargo cover gets installed in the brackets which sit 4-6 behind the rear seatbacks; I want those 4-6 inches covered. He said they would be if the seatbacks were reclined, but again, that's packaged with a moonroof.
The coffee cup thing isn't a big deal. But it would be nice to know I can run into a convenience store, get a cup to stay awake on the road, and not have to worry that I didn't bring my commuter cup. The pops-out-of-the-dash one in my 2002 is great.
Bob
Phil
Len
Elliot
The real issue here is the cabin is compact (read: narrow), so there's not a wide center console for the arm rest or cup holders, or anything like that.
Needless to say, due to the idiots packaging these vehicles, I constantly find myself in a base model instead of the $30,000 model I'd like to be in.
Nice touch can be a cell phone holder - doesn't need to be something fancy, just functional.
Thanks, Zec
My recommendation is to go drive a 5-speed Forester, then make up your own mind.
Bob
And, don't be too tough on us nascent geezers, you young-uns. As we age, our vision and reaction time do diminish, and what might seem superfluous or dotty to a 20-something can be awfully nice, safe, and convenient to someone older, who like me at 56, is just starting to appreciate why all those laws and safety features for "seniors" were enacted in the first place. But, if you see that deadly combination of FL plates and a blue disability sticker ahead of you blocking the fast lane, don't hesitate to flash your lights and tell him or her to get outta the way! :P
As to changes on the 2010 Forester, don't expect much, as it was just redesigned. The 2010 Legacy will be getting an auto-up driver's window (plus a complete redesign), so would expect other 2010 Subies to also get an auto-up driver's window. That's the kind of minor upgrades you're likely to see for 2010.
Bob
yes... because as in most other vehicles with normally positioned passenger seats, there has been a rash of people falling out of open windows.
Salesman are trained to say anything.
Still, they crash test on the driver's side, and it goes much higher than the passenger seat, which is the low one.
My Outback is 6.5 years old and I personally have probably only turned the lights off 3 times. I just leave them on all the time.
The short shifter lasted one day in the xB. I expected it to shorten the throw, but I did not expect it to make the shifting so quick and hard to do, almost like throwing a circuit breaker. It felt bad to me and was hard on the synchros. I much prefer the stock shifter for smooth easy shifting, and the xB throw is not objectionably long.
The shifter in the manual Foresters does have a longer throw and covers a lot of distance. But if a short shifter made the throw as fast and hard as in the xB, I would stay with the stock shifter. I think factory engineers know best when they design these shifters.