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.
Comments
IMHO:
black--the usual objection. Having owned a black car that didn't look real clean one day after a wash, I won't go there again.
white--not bad, but looks more like a "pure" white than the sort of "pearl" white (Outback) I prefer. Also, said to be less desirable to many, so a possible resale effect.
gold--I don't mind what's often called "champagne," but this gold looks pretty dull to me. Almost seems to have a slightly greenish gold tinge (or was it bad light?)
And the contenders:
silver: the simple, safe choice, which is probably why every third car (and SUV) I see these days seems to be silver. Goes well with black interior, but maybe it's time to break from the pack...
red: or should I say, "cayenne" red. I didn't like it at first, but it's growing on me. Also looks pretty good with the black inside, and seems to be a bit different of a red than other "reds." Plus it isn't silver.
On the whole, I think I like the Outback colors better, but the XT--well, there's that turbo.
BTW, cheapest unleaded gas these days in San Diego is around $2.18. ARRRGGGH! Happy Labor Day Weekend to all - if you can afford to drive anywhere!
IMHO, the light gray interior in the white XS is really pretty, esp in leather,and the beige looks really nice with the red exterior.
Mark
On the other hand, about 50% of the US population cannot possibly live with an (almost) black interior and/or exterior, due to outside temperatures and sunshine angles and hours. All the XT offers is a black interior.
Fuji Heavy Motors, fire the color marketing people at SoA, and get with it!
It’s OK not to be mainstream in many ways, but with colors, you have to offer at least the principal options and combinations that are close to mainstream – even if just to allow practical people (your bread and butter customers!) to participate.
- D
I've owned over 30 cars, from Honda Civics to v-12 Ferrari's. One irrefutable observation is that performance and economy are diametrically opposed. The more economy the less performance and the more performance the less economy. If you want economy buy an XS and get 28 mpg on regular. If you want 0-60 in under 6 sec, you are going to pay for it in premium gas and 20 mpg. What's the problem?
Check out that issue of C&D that includes the XT test closely and you will see that the XT beat ALL, repeat, ALL, of the cover story "Racy Roadsters" (Audi TT, BMW Z4, Honda S2000, Nissan 350Z, Porsche Boxster)in the following categories: 0-60, 1/4 mile time, 5-60, 30-50, 50-70, except that the Z4 tied it in 0-60 and was slightly faster in 5-60. In some of the "rolling start" categories the XT is 1 to 3 seconds FASTER.
Next check out the C&D 600 mile trip avg's - they run from 20 to 24 mpg - compared to the XT test mileage of 20 mpg - not much difference.
Lastly look at the "as tested" price differences - they are $8,000, $13,000, $17,000, $20,000 or $25,000 MORE expensive.
No question that these roadsters will out handle the XT, but put on some slightly larger and stickier tires and I'll bet the XT will pull in the .8 g's range. Plus you get to carry 4 people and the dog - try that in a Z4.
So next time you pull up along side one of these roadsters, ask them if they want to run 1/4 miles for pink slips and watch their hysterical laughter turn to horror in your rear-view mirror as you pull away from them.
The point? - Stop being so concerned with gas mileage and enjoy the car - it's the SUV (maybe even car) performance bargain of the year.
Speaking of gas mileage/prices, the Tahoe basin probably has the highest avg gas prices in the 48 states all the time as everything has to be trucked in. Todays prices on the California side are: Shell - 2.29, 2.39, 2.49; Beacon (discount) - 2.19, 2.29, 2.39. On the Nevada side they are Chevron - 2.23, 2.33, 2.43(different state taxes) I buy gas at CostCo (28 miles away in Carson City, NV) 2.04 regular and 2.20 premium (no mid-grade). Cost me just over $50 to fill up the Tundra 4x4 (supercharged V-6 with 5-spd) with premium today.
Have fun, Tahoe Charlie
Regarding your 98 Forester's lights, I own a 2000 which I'll assume has exactly the same reflectors, bulb, and translucent lens as yours. I've had the reflectors checked by my dealer. I'm within specs.
That said, I could use maybe 30% more light, wrt beam reach and brightness. I test drove a 2003 Accord & and put it next to my 2000 Forester in a dark field. Accord appeared to cast it's low beams ab about one third farther (and 25% brighter).
I've not tested a 2004 Forester but I will soon as I have one on order. But I have put my 2000S against a 2004 XS and found brightness and low beam reach about equal. Does that mean no significant change in seven model years? If so, I find it hard to understand, given the company's marketing of safety.
What I'd like to see is objective testing, rather like CR's recent test with 41 vehicles. I hope we get it soon. Meanwhile it's hard to argue against more light, especially with XTs. Testosterone and Torque (T and T) is a volatile mixture. And while slowing down is always an option, I doubt it's an attractive one for those with a bad case of "turbo rush".
I would guess I am quite a bit older than you, so my night vision will for sure be inferior to yours (drive your '98 Forester long enough and you'll be there too). Age will make any objective deficiency that much worse. Maybe SOA will read this post and roll out a "Geezer Package" for MY2005 (VDC, HIDs, and, just in case, more airbags, so as not to lose a repeat customer).
Jake
Bet you can all guess which car is a lot more fun to drive...
I'd already heard the mileage info and knew it needed premium when I got it. So, I'm only stating the facts, nothing more. I just think Subaru needs to make one little addition to the new day/night mirror (which by the way works way better than the previous style) - a little sticker that says:
"Objects in the rear view mirror wish they could keep up with you"
Larry
The bottom line is this: does the vehicle come within its published EPA numbers or doesn't it? And if so, where in the range does it fall? To be interested in this and/or to comment on it as an owner is not to mistake the type of vehicle we're talking about but is a simple practical consideration among other considerations. The fact that this may be an enthusiast's vehicle in many respects doesn't preclude wondering about the more pragmatic.
John
Idfal: gas mileage ALWAYS improves as a car is broken in. It should go up about 10% after several thousand miles.
Recalling several posts here over the past months, it seems that several people who bought XT's were surprised by the gearing and mileage of the XT.
It appears they may have violated the number one cardinal rule of car buying:
NEVER, NEVER BUY A CAR YOU HAVE NOT DRIVEN, preferable extensively.
Sorry, but buying a car sight unseen and untested, and then complaining about it sounds like sour grapes to me.
Tahoe Charlie
And, "To complain about gas mileage of 20 mpg when one is getting 0-60 in under 6 seconds, is, IMHO, ludicrous."
There are two groups of XT owners participating here: Those who are content with its appetite for premium fuel, and those who are not. Members on each side have from time to time presented various rationales for their conclusions.
One of the two group persists in using derogatory, belittling terms to describe the other.
Is this conference intended to be primarily a clique of XT cheerleaders, made up of "don't ruin my party" types who are free to trivialize dissenting viewpoints at will?
But what do I know, I bought a used Outback that I hadn't seen in 3 years that was 3,000 miles away, flew up, hopped in and drove it home. Still need to check the mileage one of these days too.
Don't forget the Subaru Crew chat tonight.
Steve, Host
We have been getting 18.5 in mixed driving on several tanks so far, which is certainly higher than the minimum published spec of 15 city (look at the small print on the window sticker). Still less than 850 miles total.
How does one determine an "appropriate" mpg for these cars? I am coming up with a number of around $500+ extra per year, comparing 28mpg (XS?) vs. 20mpg and $0.20 extra for 93 gas for 15000 miles. Yeah, and the car cost more to begin with. Is that a reasonable price to pay for VROOM?
(PS, for a car that can be more docile and fuel efficient most of the time but VROOM only when you really need it, see the WRX ;-) )
I'll admit the roof rail color scheme is beyond me.
There was some rationale involved - I wear jeans to work a lot - I work in a lab environment that is very harsh on "good" clothes. Being the old fashioned guy that I am, I like my new jeans to be blue, not pre-faded, stonewashed etc. Anyway, the blue color used to leech into the tan leather like crazy on my XS.
Not an issue with the black. I also think Subaru uses a decent grade of leather.
Larry
I do find it interesting that XT owners seem to be very passionate about their cars, and also passionate about their opinions of their cars.
If you followed the "regular" Forester thread, there is little if any disagreement among owners. People generally feel pretty good about their pretty good Subie.
The XT makes people choose sides, it's a little more controversial, if you will.
Keep the discussion going, folks. I, for one, find it very interesting to hear all the varying points of view. Let's not make it personal, it's all about the XT.
-juice
As you say, lets stay focused.
Larry
-juice
Wow! Touchy aren't we.
I don't consider "whining" to be a derogatory, belittling term and I never mentioned anyone by name.
Sorry if any one else took it the wrong way.
And yes, Steve, this forum has all points of view.
But the XT is a very high performance car and to complain that it gets (relatively) lousy gas mileage, requires premium and has badly matched gears as some have done, begs the question: Why did you buy the car in the first place?
Ballistic: you never address this point I was trying to make, you just complain about my choice of words.
BTW, I agree relating mileage and driving experiences can help those on the fence about purchasing one; but you still must drive one.
However, after buying one, seems one should learn to live with it. Lights, rear-view mirrors, sunroofs, gauges, etc are all items that one can changed after purchase and the postings concerning these items are very useful; but mileage and gears are not easily changed without an enormous expense.
I have driven an XT AT twice now and will probably trade my 98 S for one - it has great performance here at 6500 feet. But am waiting to drive the MT; no one within 150 miles has any.
TC
John
Anyway, I'm rather enjoying this discussion as I too am considering a purchase of the XT (especially if SOA see's the error of it's ways and offers the MT with the Premium Package) and I want to read about all the positive and negatives that people are experiencing with their new XT's.
The more negative comments the better because if I get an XT before the new Legacy GT arrives I'll likely get a really large case of buyers remorse. ;^)
Thanks,
-Ian
TWRX
It is what the sticker said, maybe a little better.
I was told by my dealer that non-premium gas will work but that premium gas was recommended. I'm sticking to premium.
I've never owned a "fast" car like this one and don't mind paying the extra. I honestly don't understand what Ballistic is complaining about. Since the car is getting what is advertised, what reason is there to complain? There are lots of cars and trucks that get worse MPG.
Michael
ps - I chose the Red/Auto/Non-premium (don't like leather). My only "complaint" I have so far is a very small ding in the front of my hood from a rock that bounced off it. Looking at the hood design, I see a few surfaces that don't provide decent angles for something to slide off vs. slamming head on. It is a tiny ding, I just noticed it because I was hand washing the car the other day.
THAT IMO is the issue with the mileage. I don't think the issue is people buying the "wrong" car. I think most people who shop Subaru are smart enough to realize that they aren't going to get XS mileage (26/21) with an XT. But some Subaru buyers who want the performance upgrade -will- be influenced by the stated EPA numbers and be disappointed if they find themselves drifting in the 16-18 mpg area instead of the 19-21 area. IMO, that's not an unreasonable view. Sure there's no free lunch, but does wanting the lower the edge of the EPA #s mean you bought wrong or that you bought right and aren't getting quite what you bought? I think that's one reason why the info sharing here is so valuable.
Picking mine up tomorrow.
The XT takes the sensible/utilitarian nature of the Forester and adds the spice of the STi. Some folks will complain about the lack of sporty handling while others will not like the fuel-hungry engine. But you all have to agree, the XT is one unique and fun vehicle!
Ken
Given that Subaru's paint quality leaves much to be desired in terms of thickness of the coat and the ability to withstand impact, the only viable choice right now is some sort of aftermarket clear bra like Stonguard etc.
Last I looked, they didn't have the '03/'04 Forester listed but it might be worth a call to check on availability.
DaveM
I noticed on my wife's Outback that they put a rising curve on the back end of the deflector - looks like its there to deflect stuff over the windshield - BTW, after 8 months on, it seems to be working - her windshield's still in great shape.
I ended up with the Stoneguard on my XT - around here its put on by an outfit call Autobahnd (sp?). Too expensive IMO, even when the dealer gave it to me at his (supposed) cost. But the options are very limited. So far it does seem to work good. They warranty it for 3 years and guarantee no shade difference in the paint when it comes off.
As someone mentioned a number of posts back, its less noticeable on silver and white models.
On my Cayenne Red you can see the edge lines when it gets dusty, but you can see a bra or deflector as well. As long as it stops the paint from taking a beating I'll be happy.
To me the down side of the bras was that on the last two cars I've had them on they require frequent removal because of the "stuff" that gets behind them then grinds itself into your paint, or the back edge of the hood bra would still flap enough (even though you couldn't see any movement when driving) such that it really beat the paint up on the last couple inches at the hood line. Those were both expensive bras too, one by LeBra, one from Mercury. (I suspect they were both made by Saddleman).
Larry
-Dave
DaveM
XT 5M with 325 miles
23 M/G (93) with 50/50
Drove conservatively with care and never revved pass 3k.
Measure with 5 gallons of fuel with 1 driver and no AC.
A couple of moderate traffic jams.
The real problem is that the XT has no peers! Once the Saturn Redline comes out, we'll see that the XT is both quicker and more efficient than the only other hot-rod sport/cute.
Didn't Edmunds get 14 mpg with their Tribute in one tank? 16 or so average? They're lead foots, so it's to be expected.
-juice
I'll put my vote for Stonequard and likes. It looks OK, invisible except the rear edge when it gets dirty. Protects well and makes bug cleaning easier. Price wise, Had it installed together with the window tint and came out cheaper than the hood deflector. Even if it lasts only 3 years (I think the 3 years term is mainly for the discoloration), with enough highway driving, it will pay for itself on gas mileage vs. deflector.
So far, the only chip I have is exactly 1/4 if an inch above the bra line
K
Larry
I've seen kits for the whole bumper - they go for around $400. I've never seen it applied to anything but the most expensive sport/luxury cars. But then, it's a mute point anyway as deflector also doesn't protect the bumper. After having an experience with the bra, I would never put it on the hood of new car. In my opinion, they make more damage than good. But, if you are concerned for your bumpers, that might be a way to go - Stonegard on the hood and vinyl bra on the bumper.
K
probs with the Turbo (heat and very high rpm) after a yr or so. From the little I have read about Turbos -they all require Premium gas-Correct? I am flipping between the XS with Premium pkg. and/or the XT. Enjoy all your Posts.
Tks. From an "Oldie" Deadeye