Subaru Crew Cafe

1…323324326328329…343

Comments

  • mkunzemkunze Member Posts: 29
    I forgot to mention that this is for my son, a college student.

    I want the stick shift because he mentioned to me that he will be the only one in his apartment who has a car.. so I should buy an automatic so his roommates could drive it too. Needless to say I certainly don't want that liability, especially if I'm paying the insurance and have all the responsibilities etc.

    The body cavity of the Forester seems larger. Thinking it would load easier.
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    edited May 2011
    As to an automatic, the Outback has a clear edge here, as it uses a new CVT. The Forester currently uses the ancient 4-speed automatic.

    There's nothing wrong with the 4-speed automatic, but it's old and not terribly efficient. The CVT delivers much better gas mileage, and will match, if not exceed, the performance of the manual.

    Subaru is looking to replace all their 4-speed automatics with CVTs, and I would not be surprised if the 2012 Forester gets that CVT tranny. We should know shortly, as the 2012 models will start trickling out this summer.

    Another thought is to consider the all-new 2012 Impreza, which should be out around September. It uses an all-new 2.0L engine, and with the CVT, gets 36 mpg on the highway. The 5-speed manual version gets 34 mpg on the highway. That's best gas mileage of any AWD car sold in America. It's available in both 5-door (hatchback) and 4-door sedan. The Impreza is also cheaper than either the Forester and Outback.

    I saw the car at the NY auto show last month (examined it closely for about 2 hours at a special pre-show preview), and was very impressed by it. I have an '09 (Impreza) WRX 5-door, and I can tell you, the new Impreza is much nicer than my car in just about every way.

    http://www.subaru.com/impreza/2012/index.html

    Bob
  • volkovvolkov Member Posts: 1,306
    edited May 2011
    Impreza is much nicer than my car in just about every way.

    Except the stupid grin when you're on boost!
    I swear sometimes my WRX gives me my only smile of the day. WRX remains unchanges despite Impreza redo right?
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    Can't argue with you there. ;)

    Yes, the WRX and STI remain much the same for 2012. Can't wait to see what they do with the WRX and STI, when they get made over.

    Bob
  • xwesxxwesx Member Posts: 17,719
    edited May 2011
    For the 2012 model year, yes, it retains the same body style as the 2011.

    Edit - darn that Bob; he's quick! Must be the WRX. :P
    2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
  • xwesxxwesx Member Posts: 17,719
    edited May 2011
    mkunze -

    If that is the car's purpose, I think the Forester would be a better fit for several reasons. First, I would be looking at a base model (either Forester or Outback), and the base model Forester has, if I recall correctly, a $2,000+ lower starting price. It is simple, compact, has fantastic versatility, excellent passenger space even for four full-size (I'm thinking long-legged college students) adults with an occasional fifth (person!), and can pull double-duty as a hauler, carrier, or puller of just about anything.

    Safety either way is top-notch, but I think you (and your son) will get more bang-for-the-buck from the Forester.

    The one draw-back... it has a bit more "pep" in the fun-to-drive department, so that could be a bad thing if your son is inclined to enjoy his driving.... ;)
    2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    LOL! Yeah, it's the WRX that's quick; me, not so much. :P

    Bob
  • robr2robr2 Member Posts: 8,805
    The one draw-back... it has a bit more "pep" in the fun-to-drive department, so that could be a bad thing if your son is inclined to enjoy his driving....

    Another drawback - college students with a big cargo hold. I wonder how many kegs and beer-pong tables fit in a Forester??
  • colin_lcolin_l Member Posts: 591
    Standard payload is 1230lb .. average keg is about 130lb.. so minus driver you could carry 7 kegs, assuming you find a way to pack them in. Maybe 6 kegs with a front seat passenger.

    This is a naked keg. If we're adding the trash can and ice, I'm sure you would hit a space limit first.. probably 3 kegs, maybe 4 at best.

    :D
  • robr2robr2 Member Posts: 8,805
    In that situation, payload is irrelevant. Dimensions of cargo space is key!!

    ;)
  • mkunzemkunze Member Posts: 29
    You guys are scaring me.
  • fibber2fibber2 Member Posts: 3,786
    That's why we have roof racks! At least two kegs on top....
  • robr2robr2 Member Posts: 8,805
    If you do it right, you can attach the beer pong table to the rack and then stack the kegs on top.

    Like I said, weight capacity is inconsequential - that 125 lbs. weight limit on the rack is merely a suggestion...

    ;)
  • xwesxxwesx Member Posts: 17,719
    edited May 2011
    that 125 lbs. weight limit on the rack is merely a suggestion...

    Whew; good thing! :P

    image
    2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
  • tsytsy Member Posts: 1,551
    How much weight before the muffler starts scraping the ground! ;)
  • colin_lcolin_l Member Posts: 591
    That's awesome! :D
  • xwesxxwesx Member Posts: 17,719
    edited May 2011
    Haha; yeah, guys, I went a little overboard on that one. Happily, the car bore it with good cheer. The weight rating for the rack is actually 150# on the 2009+ Forester, but I easily exceeded that by double (probably more, sadly). I had two 3/4" sheets of plywood plus eight sheets of 1/2" gypsum. It didn't sound like much when I was sent on the errand, but I knew I was being optimistic after hefting the first pair of drywall up. :blush:

    Thankfully, I only had eight miles to travel home, so I was able to take it easy and not risk shearing the rack off the top!
    2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    If the Forester manual trans is only available in the base model with poor lumbar support, there is a potential problem

    You can get a manual with the base X, the X Premium (at a minimum the fabric is different), or the X Premium w/AWP (heated seats). So try them, the seats are different on all 3, at least slightly different.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    so minus driver you could carry 7 kegs

    If you figure out how to do that...you'd better invite us to that party! LOL
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    edited May 2011
    My record is 5 sheets of plywood, so I think you beat me there...
  • xwesxxwesx Member Posts: 17,719
    I don't know if the X (with manual driver seat adjustments) has adjustable lumbar support, but the electronic seat in the Premium does for sure. I think it's pretty good - it "pooches out" further than I would feel comfortable using, anyway.

    I think I have mine set at about 3/4 the way to maximum.

    One thing that would be nice is if it also moved up and down within the seat. Am I asking for too much? :blush:
    2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
  • xwesxxwesx Member Posts: 17,719
    Your "record" is far more reasonable. I'll do my best to not best it again. :D
    2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
  • mkunzemkunze Member Posts: 29
    I bought a Forester today. The deciding factor was this thread:

    http://townhall-talk.edmunds.com/direct/view/.f131668/459

    It may just be a big nothing, but it just seemed like something I didn't want to hassle with right now given a choice. The CVT may just be a little less smooth, but since I was not inclined either way, it made the choice easier.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    edited May 2011
    CVTs are love/hate.

    Personally, I've sampled a few bad ones (Mitsubishi) and a few good ones (Nissan), but few technologies inspires such hatred.

    I wouldn't mind one for the MPGs alone.

    Any how, congrats on the Forester. We have an 09, my brother just got a 2011, and my sister still has her 03 model.
  • mkunzemkunze Member Posts: 29
    So you think it's just a matter of taste - nothing flawed that would haunt over time? Transmission problems are always a big PITA. Sounded like potential. What do you think? I could have lived with a rougher type shifting IF it wasn't an indicator of future trouble.

    In any case, the manual shift Forester is rated only 1mpg less than the CVT Outback.
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    Congrats! I think your son will thank you for it (he better!), as the Forester will be a bit more fun to drive. it's just a bit more nimble than the larger Outback.

    Bob
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Some CVTs were problematic, I think the Ford Freestyle got a lot of complaints. I don't think Nissan's have been bad, though.

    The CVT is new to Subaru, though, so that's always a risk, v1.0 and all.

    The MT5 is a good choice regardless. CR got the best mileage among non-hybrid compact crossovers.
  • hammerheadhammerhead Member Posts: 907
    Drove a company car Escape Hybrid v.1 a while back - I have nothing good to say about it. I would have a high incidence of skepticism about any v.1 component. Give 'em a year or two.

    My next one? Outback. 6 speed manual. No timetable other than 'get it paid off before I retire'.
  • mkunzemkunze Member Posts: 29
    When I picked it up yesterday the dealership was all ga-ga about the CVT and said they had seen no problems. I told them about the Edmunds thread and they seemed unimpressed. It could be nothing, Maybe in a few years, when the jury is in, I'll buy one.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    edited May 2011
    Well, the Escape has aged a lot, so it's a very dated package overall. That thing came out in 2000, IIRC, and has really only had one significant update.

    I actually took my brother to drive a manual/base model, but they were out. Actually they said they don't even order manuals. We drove a V6 with the new 6 speed auto. No thanks...
  • kurtamaxxxguykurtamaxxxguy Member Posts: 1,798
    edited May 2011
    Base Forester seats do not have lumbar adjustment nor much lumbar support. If possible, spring for up-level seats which have more padding and lumbar adjustments.

    Btw, Subaru's posted new tests for AWD on inclined ramps and emergency handling, certified by USA Auto club. Comparisons are with RAV4, Escape, CR-V and Rogue. Forester beat them all.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Link pretty please?

    I love those videos...
  • kurtamaxxxguykurtamaxxxguy Member Posts: 1,798
    The videos are on Subaru's official web site this time:

    http://www.subaru.com/engineering/all-wheel-drive.html

    http://www.subaru.com/engineering/safety.html
  • colin_lcolin_l Member Posts: 591
    I wouldn't buy a CVT. I think Nissan's success with them is atypical, and other vendors will likely have problems. They've been around a long time for very small displacement cars, and I expect some growing pains as manufacturers try to adopt them for larger output engines.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Audi was also an early adopter but I don't think they've been as trouble-free as Nissan's.
  • fibber2fibber2 Member Posts: 3,786
    I didn't get to the NY Auto Show this year, but last year Ford devoted a large amount of floor space to working models of their dry, dual-clutch 'automatics' in small and medium sizes. They seem to think that 6 spd geared boxes are preferred to CVT for most cars and cross-overs, and that the fluid based autos will eventually be large car / truck only.
  • tsytsy Member Posts: 1,551
    The CVT is new to Subaru, though, so that's always a risk, v1.0 and all.

    Ahh, but Juice, Subaru had a CVT Justy, oh, what was that, 20 years ago???

    ;)

    While I don't necessarily like CVTs, I had a CVT in my Hybrid and like anything you get used to it and it's fine driving it. I wouldn't buy one for a performance car but it is neat how it just keeps the car at the same RPM and just accelerates. Hypothetically, it is the optimal transmission performance wise.

    But I still like Manuals myself. I wonder how much longer they'll be around though???

    tom
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Does a bad previous experience count? ;)

    I gave them a clean slate. Wonder who makes the CVT? JATCO?
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    The videos are on Subaru's official web site this time:

    http://www.subaru.com/engineering/all-wheel-drive.html

    http://www.subaru.com/engineering/safety.html

    Sweet...and certified by USAC.

    I'm sure they arranged the cones juuuuust right in that 2nd video on the safety page so that the Forester would be the only one that could make it, but it still performed the best.

    Love the video on those ramps, though.

    *ALL* wheel drive should mean a single rear wheel should be able to climb, yet Honda, Nissan, Toyota, and Ford all fail that simple test. Perhaps they should call them MOST wheel drive?
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    edited May 2011
    http://www.autoblog.com/2011/05/23/mini-and-dsquared-present-the-cooper-s-red-mu- - dder-at-life-bal/#continued

    Bob
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    That is pretty darn cool...AWD too. Love those tires and how they fill up the fender flares.
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    edited June 2011
    http://allaboutbikes.com/motorcycle-sports/road-track-racing/isle-man-tt-racing/- - - - 4314-subaru-named-official-car-of-isle-of-man-tt

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVXc29ZgutI

    The Isle of Man TT is without a doubt, the most exciting series of bike races on earth. I'm really happy to see Subaru being a sponsor.

    Bob
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    edited June 2011
    http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2011/06/spied-ram-2500-heavy-duty-with-rambox.html

    http://www.allpar.com/news/index.php/2011/05/ram-to-get-64-rambox-more-updates

    Currently it's only available in the light-duty 1500 models, and with a short 5'7" pickup bed.

    Bob
  • xwesxxwesx Member Posts: 17,719
    edited June 2011
    That cargo box is a brilliant idea. I have heard there were (are?) some issues with its durability, but I think, in terms of functionality, it is the first true improvement over the classic "step-side" boxes that pre-dated the "fleet-side" box of today.

    I'm happy to see that its availability is expanding.
    2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    edited June 2011
    These shouldn't even be options, they should be standard.

    There's so much wasted space outside and around pickup beds, and those add-on tool boxes eat up way too much bed length.

    Ram needs a unique feature in order to stand out, especially now that 55% of Fords are V6 models, so they seem to be doing well with the fuel efficiency angle.
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    That's 55% of F-150s in May, not F-Super Duty models. :)

    Bob
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    They need a SuperEcoBoost for those. LOL
  • colin_lcolin_l Member Posts: 591
    Yeah like a 300ci inline six with a turbo... :D
  • KCRamKCRam Member Posts: 3,516
    Disagree to an extent, Juice.

    The RamBox fills in the bed all the way to the inner wheelwell line, leaving the entire bed about 50 inches wide (essentially 4 feet). A standard bed reaches 70 inches wide - that can be the difference between putting something 5 feet or so in length in the bed transversely between the cab and rear axle (and having the wheelwells keep it in place) and having that same item take up the entire bed.

    Granted, I'm looking at this from the perspective of having owned nothing but full-size pickups with 8-foot beds for over 20 years. While I don't use my truck commercially, I do spec it that way - the concept of buying more truck than you may need, just in case. Since I'm completely used to the extra length, I don't have maneuverability or parking concerns, even with dually fenders, so the desire for a shorter box has never been there. And on the occasions I do carry items in the bed, I have yet to be in a situation where I wished I had more floor area... being able to carry a queen-size mattress set flat within the lateral dimensions of the bed means regular tie downs and no rearward visibility issues from having to stand them on their sides.

    Strictly my 2¢, though. :)

    kcram - Pickups/Wagons/Vans+Minivans Host
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    The same can be said with trucks with utility bodies, in that there is only about 50" of width in load space.

    It really comes down to how you use your truck. Carrying a queen-sized mattress flat is not a big priority for me or many others. Having useful storage compartments in the rear fenders is something I could make use of on a daily basis. It may not be for everyone, but I'm glad Ram is offering this feature—and is expanding its availability.

    Bob
Sign In or Register to comment.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles

Your Privacy

By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our Visitor Agreement.