Subaru Crew: Suggestions for Subaru

1…6791112…47

Comments

  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    Joybell, you are unique. The people here in the US are spoiled. We want AC, Power Everything, etc. Even the most spartan cars like the KIAs come with most of that stuff std. People won't pay for a subaru econobox, they'll just buy a Focus or a Kia, you won't be able to crank out subarus as cheap as Focus/Kias/etc. so you'll loose.

    -mike
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Sad but true.

    -juice
  • armac13armac13 Member Posts: 1,129
    is exactly (with a bit more power) the car that I would hope Subaru would sell in Canada. It is the only one that I would be able to afford new, and the size would be ideal to my needs.

    Ross
  • jlemolejlemole Member Posts: 345
    Is there an engineering/safety reason for not having a rear gate where the glass flips up, and the gate flips down? It would make hauling the occasional over-length items possible.

    Jon
  • ladywclassladywclass Member Posts: 1,713
    I've also wished on occasion for an "operational" window in the back if only for the ventilation on a warm day. (I'm sure you guys aren't aware that it's easier on "hair" if you open a tailgate window rather than side windows....)
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    I loved the one on my rodeo. My guess is that they don't have em for either safety or NV#s. I'd love to see a rear liftgate that had a window go down into the bottom like a std window goes into a door. :)

    -mike
  • joybelljoybell Member Posts: 275
    Armac13 - Why not make those Chasers again just for us, eh? Started every cold winter morning, got us out of snowed-in driveways that we don't have time (or want to) shovel, a real basic Subaru. It doesn't deserve to be knocked because it didn't have fancy power gadgets. It was affordable, dependable, practical and unique. It introduced me to Subaru ownership.
  • jlemolejlemole Member Posts: 345
    I guess Subaru doesn't envision their "niche" to involve trips to Lowes for lumber; hence no flip down rear gate.

    Jon
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Use the roof rack!

    Of course my roof rack is all scratched up from hauling 6'x8' panels of fence, but hey.

    -juice
  • joybelljoybell Member Posts: 275
    No doubt the Forester will spoil me. Then I will no longer be "unique". I'm still waiting for the dealer to call with the VIN number and delivery date. However, I will always have fond memories of my older Subies.
  • bat1161bat1161 Member Posts: 1,784
    Hey Juice,

    Was that the PVC privacy fence, or wood? I ask because I'm looking into changing my fence and will be hauling it home on my OB (to keep it Subie related).

    Mark
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    My buddy owns a Town House, he had termites eat up two sections of wood fence.

    We hauled the old stuff to the dump, then hit Home Depot and picked up two new sections. They were pressure treated and weighed a decent amount. More than 2 of them would probably exceed the roof rack's capacity of 150 lbs.

    I also hauled 5 sheets of OSB/plywood composite home, 4'x8' and 3/8" thick, in one trip. Who needs a pickup?

    -juice
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    Since it appears the Baja's unit-construction won't allow for a true switchback, like that of the STX concept, I suggest the following:

    • Make the switchback's width opening the same as the bed width, which is 49." It is currently 30" wide. That way 4' wide paneling could be accommodated, even though it still would have to hang over the bed extender.

    • Make the switchback's height opening 16." It is currently 12" high.

    • Give the Baja's rear seat a 60/40 split-fold, and also give the switchback's folding panel a split-fold to match the rear seat.

    Bob
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    Now that it appears clear that the Forester XT is set to whomp the 2.0 WRX, for all-around performance, it's time for Subaru to up the anti by offering a 2.5 WRX. Perhaps use the engine from the upcoming Legacy GT, with a rumored + or - 270 HP?

    Bob
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Too close to the STi.

    I say just use the Forester engine. The WRX is lighter and more aerodynamic already.

    -juice
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    It needs to be more powerful than the XT engine—and certainly NOT less powerful than the current WRX engine. I say 240 – 250 HP would be a good compromise. That won't step on the STi's toes, but would give a clear edge over the XT.

    Bob
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Less power, more torque. It could be quicker with lower insurance rates.

    Though I doubt they'll do it, unless they plan on paying CAFE fines regularly. There were at the limit last year already.

    -juice
  • joybelljoybell Member Posts: 275
    No kidding. My father-in-law's Buick has one. However, make it so that it can be deactivated for those people who use it for rallys.
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    There's a warning light on the instrument panel. That seems to work for most people.

    Bob
  • joybelljoybell Member Posts: 275
    even though it only happened twice in 12 years of driving manual shift (never use handbrake with automatic). Warning lights are in a bad place, but that's because of the way I drive, with my left hand between 10 and 11 o'clock on the steering wheel. AND, the symbol for handbrake on ([!]) would not make sense to someone who didn't have a manual handy to look it up. I guess these are just excuses. The only one to blame for driving 10 highway miles with the handbrake engaged on my brand new Forester is me.
  • joybelljoybell Member Posts: 275
    Just out of curiousity (to see if you guys in the USA had a more logical symbol for brake system), I checked the owner's manual for the 2003 Forester (page 3-13). WOW, you actually get a real word "BRAKE"! It's only the Canadians that get the ((!)) symbol, which first timers have to look up in the manual to see what it means.....unless they clue-in before that. I suppose we get that goofy symbol in order not to upset the French speaking population in our country.
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    if they had an "international" symbol of some sort, like most of the symbols.

    Bob
  • hypovhypov Member Posts: 3,068
    How 'bout making it luminate brighter and blink. That should catch one's attention.

    -Dave
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    Driving a pouring rain on I-95 yesterday, for over 250 miles, makes one appreciate the rear fog lights found on European-spec cars. A lot of the cars, because of the water spray, you could not see the tail lights.

    Bob
  • jlawton2jlawton2 Member Posts: 25
    Speaking of water spray, is it my imagination or has spray increased the last few years?

    My wife pointed it out awhile ago and it's her conjecture that either road surfaces have caused the change or tires have gotten much better at shedding water and thus the amount of spray/mist is much more than we remember years ago.

    You're driving along feeling like you're in a blinding rain storm. But you look over and realize it's not raining much at all it's just the mist billowing out a qtr mile from behind a truck or something.

    Then again maybe it's the increase in traffic, and especially from semi's, even though the rain may be mild or stopped the mist is constant over the highway surface. Less hydroplane is a good thing but now we can't SEE! (I guess if we had an XT we could pass the culprits and leave the problem behind us. Nothing worse than driving for hours in spray.

     I wish I had little wipers on my rearviews. I about got myself creamed merging onto the Merritt Pkwy last week with the rearviews totally burbled over with water. (Not fast enough rolling the window down and wiping with my sleeve.) I was kind of hoping that the de-icer would burn off some water but not to be.

    J
  • jlemolejlemole Member Posts: 345
    J: I have to agree with you on the rear view mirror issue. When it rains, it seems that the water/dirt immediately renders the rear-view mirrors useless. I've tried Rain-X, but that didn't work. I'm wondering if a glass wax would work better. Anyone have any experience??

    Jon
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    Hmmm... I've had no problems with the heated mirrors drying the mirrors in the rain. They work great on our Forester. You do have to turn them on every 15 minutes, however, as there is a built-in timer to turn them off.

    Bob
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    I'm sure there are those who feel the STi, as it comes from the factory, is a bit bare in terms of comfort features. I'm suggesting that SOA offer an optional "Premium Package," not unlike that found on the WRX sedan.

    It would include:

    * Moonroof
    * AWP
    * McIntosh audio system
    * Fog lights

    If it's an option, those who think the above stuff to be superfluous, wouldn't have to buy it; but those who like that stuff, will now have that opportunity.

    Bob
  • joybelljoybell Member Posts: 275
    This has always been an issue, except when the kids were smaller, but why don't the back seat windows go all the way down on Subaru wagons? We were at an African Safari Park (where the kids can touch Zebras, Antelopes, Ostriches, etc during the drive through the park). We noticed that the Honda CR-Vs had the back windows down completely. Not to complain too much, but I just wonder what the (mechanical?) reason is that those Subaru rear windows only go halfway down.
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    It's because of the rear window well intruding into the door where the window would roll down.

    They could certainly modify the rear window, by having a small fixed pane of glass near the rear wheel well, which would then allow for the window to roll down. This would also mean the Subaru's "frameless window system" wouldn't work. However, in doing so, it would increase the manufacturing cost of the vehicle a bit.

    Judging by your history of vehicle cost-conscious posts, this is not something you would readily welcome. ;)

    Bob
  • locke2clocke2c Member Posts: 5,038
    Joy--

    It's very much the shape of the window and the shape of the rear door.

    The door has a lot of curve at the bottom towards the rear of the vehicle, which cannot permit a full-width window to go down all the way.

    If Subaru went with a shorter (length from front to rear of vehicle) window, it could go down all the way. Look at the shape of the windows on a Miata as an example.

    -Colin
  • joybelljoybell Member Posts: 275
    By "eyeballing" the rear window and door, it seems to me that the window COULD go down a lot further than it does, especially in the new model Forester because it appears that the window is smaller in height than on the older Forester (anyone care to measure?). BTW I do like the frameless window style for visibility.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    They'd need longer wheelbases to have room in the doors for the entire window.

    Careful what you wish for though, the Miata has a huge blind spot with the top up. Subaru's visibility is excellent, just about the best I've ever experienced.

    -juice
  • locke2clocke2c Member Posts: 5,038
    erm... anything with a convertible top tends to have poor visibility when it's up! :)

    didn't mean to make the miata a red herring-- was just explaining the window situation on the Subarus. many cars are this way, where the rear window won't go down fully.

    -Colin
  • oregonboyoregonboy Member Posts: 1,650
    J -

    I think you are right that there is more road spray than in the "good old days" (whenever that may have been). Causes include: more traffic, higher speeds (ever notice that truckers rarely slow AT ALL for rain?), more aggressive tread designs (SUV and 4x4), wheels mounted closer to (or beyond) the outer edge of the body, increased ground clearance (SUV & 4x4), mudflaps that used to be standard and are now optional (a little poke at Subaru to put this post back on topic).

    -james (who installed Toyota EOM mudflaps on his 2wd Tacoma)
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Yes, but you can barely see to the side, never mind to the side and behind. Basicaly the window is tiny. I usually open mine and stick my head outside to see!

    And to bring this back on topic - no more cost cutting, Subaru! Make the mud flaps standard on the Forester again! My sister came over yesterday and you could see stripes of road grime along the rear side bumper.

    -juice
  • bat1161bat1161 Member Posts: 1,784
    Actually I could never understand why mud flaps and carpet mats are extra- Doesn't everyone use them now a days? Make them standard for all models.

    Mark
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Well, particularly on an SUV that's marketed driving through gravel and rock trails. Those things can chip the paint!

    -juice
  • locke2clocke2c Member Posts: 5,038
    Pretty sure most Foresters live out their lives never seeing anything but pavement... it's a tall wagon, too. :)

    -Colin
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Even accepting that, what about the salt/sand trucks that pour that stuff all over the snowy roads, which are littered with Subies?

    -juice
  • locke2clocke2c Member Posts: 5,038
    A lot of other vehicles on the road seem to make due without! I think it's fashion more than function-- if a lot of customers think they are ugly, or a truck-thing, they won't want them on a car-like vehicle. IMO

    I put mudflaps on my Impreza for rocks. (Pirelli winter tires work great on gravel, btw.)

    -Colin
  • lark6lark6 Member Posts: 2,565
    Mudflaps are great for a car that spends time on gravel; here in eastern PA we have municipalities that salt, those that sand, and those that gravel, often next to each other. I just wish they were bigger!

    I'm also at a loss to understand why the flaps on the Forester XS and XT are painted; wouldn't they get chipped as well? I'd be inclined to have unpainted X flaps installed on my higher-trimmed Forester.

    Ed
  • joybelljoybell Member Posts: 275
    I thought I was getting mudflaps (brochure pictured a Forester 2.5x with mudflaps), and was a little disappointed when I found out mine did not have mudflaps. I'm on a farm and our lanes are mud and gravel, when not snow and ice. I knew before I bought it that the 2003 Forester had been "stripped-down" to reduce both weight and cost. Still, I would rather have mudflaps (which are usefull...to me) than cruise control (which is not).
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    are easy to install. Just pick them up at the parts counter, and install them yourself, or get your husband to do so.

    Bob
  • joybelljoybell Member Posts: 275
    Reduced visibility in 2003 Forester? I think so. My Loyale (which I still have) has more visibility, especially over my left shoulder. I think the large head restraints might be part of the problem, but I also think that there is less window (thicker pillar?) than on the older Forester.
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    definitely contribute to reduced rear visibility.

    Bob
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    That's it, next time I detail the Miata, Colin is coming over to do apply the Bug & Tar remover to the bottom rear fender! ;-)

    Try a Volvo. The huge head rests totally got in my way.

    Let me take this opportunity to ask for Legacy-style head rest mounts on the Forester. You can mount them in the cargo area, upside down and out of the way, when child seats are installed. Brilliant. It's also useful when you fold the seats forward.

    Please don't delete that feature on the next Legacy!

    -juice
  • joybelljoybell Member Posts: 275
    It's the huge restraint behind "my" head that I meant. I haven't seen the Volvo ones, but can't imagine them any bigger. I suppose it's a safety thing.
  • locke2clocke2c Member Posts: 5,038
    Juice, let me drive first and we'll be removing hunks of rubber from the rear fender!

    -Colin
  • jlemolejlemole Member Posts: 345
    When I first saw that the rear headrests could be stowed behind the seats, I thought that was just the coolest thing ever. I agree with Juice -- Subaru must keep that little convenience in the next generation Legacy. That, and the rumored storage of the rear cargo cover.

    Jon
This discussion has been closed.

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.