Subaru XT Turbo Forester

16566687071131

Comments

  • dcm61dcm61 Member Posts: 1,567
    you take a chance of getting pregnant. ;-)

    DaveM
  • overtime1overtime1 Member Posts: 134
    Averaging 19.2mpg over my first 1800 miles. I'm not terribly easy on the gas however.

    overtime
  • ballisticballistic Member Posts: 1,687
    The Forester climate control problems (normal or XT) don't seriously affect your ability to control the system manually. I have no idea why any car needs automatic climate control anyway, so IMO manual control is the way to go.

    The XT gas mileage issue depends entirely on one's perspective. People whose top priority is maximum performance think the XT's mileage is fine. Those of us who are disappointed seem to be in the minority.
  • bsumpterbsumpter Member Posts: 35
    My average mpg (FXT 5 speed) is still hanging in there right at 22 on my usual commute with 13,000 miles so far. Yesterday's fillup was 22.37 mpg to be exact...

    Pure highway driving (70-80 mph) gets me 25 mpg consistently, with 3-4 tanks a bit higher than that in the 26-27 range - never less than 25 on 100% highway tanks yet. Believe it or don't, doesn't matter to me :)

    I didn't look at the mpg figures at all when buying the FXT, performance was the thing for me. Needless to say I'm not disappointed in that department - the only change I'm looking at is wheels/tires, haven't decided if I'll wait another year or so until the OEM ones wear out. I'm thinking 225/55/17, slightly taller than stock - as the speedometer reads about 4% high right now they'll be just about right.
  • ballisticballistic Member Posts: 1,687
    It would be really interesting to drive two XTs side-by-side under the same exact conditions... one that has been delivering 20mpg or less, and another that's been producing 25-26-27, to see what they do under controlled conditions. Maybe even swapping drivers. There seems to be a great deal of variation between XTs in terms of their fuel consumption. Those whose XTs are at the high end are understandably satisfied. Those at the low end aren't.
  • once_for_allonce_for_all Member Posts: 1,640
    regarding your points:

    1) The rpm/mph ratio is identical for the XT/XS in 5th gear. Possibly there is an affect at lower speeds, but highway mpg differences are dramatic between the two engines;

    2) Yes, tuning etc. compression, etc. power mode and so forth can all be summed up then as "less efficient".

    John
  • john284john284 Member Posts: 71
    Your three point summary touched some interesting areas, but first two about gear ratio and fuel mix could be attained for NA 2.5, but I doubt that affect MPG too much, CRV has similar mod(at least in the gear ratio part), and MPG didn't go down much.
    As to your third point about compression ratio, I thought it should be the other way around. Note that FXT needs premium gas that dictates an at least 10:1 compression ratio....
    Finally, I guess 25 mpg for FXT is unrealistic, maybe next time when you reported your MPG, you should also attach an analysis report on lead content in your local water...it doesn't just get into your head...it is also in your foot...
  • bluesubiebluesubie Member Posts: 3,497
    There was a Subaru chat with a tech from SoA. Someone asked if the first oil change was too early and he said the earlier the better.

    -Dennis
  • lfdallfdal Member Posts: 679
    By the time I got my XT I'd already seen on this board that it took premium and that the mpg figures weren't that great. Also, I'd had the psycho auto climate control in my 03 XS so I knew about that going in as well.

    Those that may remember my initial posts recall my steering beam problems, which are not quite resolved yet. Another story.

    All that being said, I've never had a regret about owning this vehicle.

    Larry
  • ballisticballistic Member Posts: 1,687
    once_for_all: 1) The rpm/mph ratio is identical for the XT/XS in 5th gear.

    True, because the XT/WRX 5th gear is taller than the X/XS, neutralizing the former's shorter final drive. However, in all gears except 5th, the XT engine is turning faster at any given road speed. So for any typical tankful of gas involving any driving at non-freeway speeds, the XT is still at a disadvantage, friction-wise.

    john284: As to your third point about compression ratio, I thought it should be the other way around. Note that FXT needs premium gas that dictates an at least 10:1 compression ratio....

    The XT needs premium gas NOT because of a high specific compression ratio (the XT's is indeed lower than the X/XS), but rather because the XT's maximum peak combustion chamber pressures while operating at high boost demand premium fuel to avoid detonation, even with its lower specific compression ratio. However, it remains true that its nominal compression ratio is lower than the naturally-aspirated X/XS, and that means that under normal non-boosted driving (meaning most of the time) the XT is at a disadvantage in terms of combustion efficiency. Ergo, poorer fuel economy.
  • samiam_68samiam_68 Member Posts: 775
    The more you press on the gas, the more the throttle opens, the more air/fuel mixture goes in, the more exhaust gas is produced, the more exhaust pressure, the more the turbo spools up.
    If it weren't for the wastegate and the redline, you could potentially attain so much boost that the engine would literally explode.
    So , the turbo spools up faster when there is demand for power, i.e. wide throttle opening.
    BTW, the turbo is always on, except at low demand it spins relatively slowly, not producing much boost. Also, just because the gauge shows negative, doesn't mean you don't have boost, just means that the boost has not exceeded the vacuum. At zero on the gauge, the boost equals the vacuum, i.e. 1 atmospheric unit.
  • john284john284 Member Posts: 71
    for xt is 9.7:1 and xs has the same. The number you quoted may come from Autrialian specific models.....
  • ballisticballistic Member Posts: 1,687
    BTW, the turbo is always on, except at low demand it spins relatively slowly, not producing much boost.

    The cold-side compressor section is a pure centrifugal blower, meaning that the boost pressures rise with the square of rising impeller RPM. At moderate engine throttle (even at steady highway speeds) the turbo might still be idling along at relatively few RPMs, adding essentially no boost at all. Snap the throttle wide-open, and the impeller quickly accelerates to as much as 150,000 shaft RPM, driven by exhaust gas on the hot side.
      
    Also, just because the gauge shows negative, doesn't mean you don't have boost, just means that the boost has not exceeded the vacuum. At zero on the gauge, the boost equals the vacuum, i.e. 1 atmospheric unit.

    I define 'boost' as pressures exceeding what a naturally-aspirated (non-boosted) engine could register on a manifold gauge. A NA engine under WOT at moderate RPMs can come quite close to zero vacuum. Ergo, by my definition, the term 'boost' requires measured pressures higher than that - reaching into the above-zero range on the vacuum/boost gauge.
  • ballisticballistic Member Posts: 1,687
    for xt is 9.7:1 and xs has the same. The number you quoted may come from Autrialian specific models

    I think you're wrong. The specs for North American XTs are the same as the Australian ones. I don't have the CR numbers at my fingertips, but I believe the 2.5-liter XT/STi compression ratio is about 8.5 no matter which market.
  • lfdallfdal Member Posts: 679
    From the manual - I'm going to paraphrase here (a lot):

    Subaru calls that port the "ASPIRATOR HOSE", and says to check it do the following:
    With the ignition switch to ON, push the “A/C” switch, set the temperature dial to maximum hot, set the air flow dial to “DEF” position, and fan speed dial to 4.
    Put a piece of thread in front of the port and check that the thread moves towards the port indicating that air is being sucked into the port.
    A permissible number to hold the thread from the port is 0.02 inches, which isn't much.

    Sounds like they want the air coming in, just very weakly - I mean a "piece of thread". Don't know what the higher speed air you're forcing in will do to the life of the sensor, but I'm going to try it anyway.

    I guess my main gripe with the auto climate control is that if its so flaky that its unusable under certain weather conditions,(some people seem to be having no problem with it, although they seem to be in the minority) is to save me the money and don't bother offer it. I mean I am paying for it on the sticker, one way or the other.

    Larry
  • john284john284 Member Posts: 71
    www.automotive.com/reviews/17/2004/ subaru/forester/25xt/buyersguide/

    www.autoweb.com.au/id_SUB/doc_sub0308041/ cms/news/newsarticle.html

    www.automotive.com/reviews/17/2004/subaru/ forester/25xs-premium/buyersguide/
  • ballisticballistic Member Posts: 1,687
    The spec table accompanying Car & Driver's August full test of the XT lists the compression ratio at 8.2:1, which is (as I suspected) identical to the published Australian specs. Here's the link:

    http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=3&article_- - id=6854&page_number=4

    It would be very unusual to not reduce an engine's compression ratio when adding a supercharger or turbocharger. This 8.2:1 value is, by the way, the same as the STi, because all internal parts between the two engines are identical.
  • ballisticballistic Member Posts: 1,687
    Another link, showing the compression ratio for the NA X/XS as 10.0:1, whereas the XT is 8.2:1. I think any sources showing otherwise are simply incorrect.

    http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/spec_engines.aspx?make=Subaru&a- mp;model=Forester&src=
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I'm sure compression is lowered for the turbo.

    -juice
  • ballisticballistic Member Posts: 1,687
    So am I, and I'm certain that fact accounts for a significant part of the XT's MPG reduction.
  • p0926p0926 Member Posts: 4,423
    Kate- From my direct observations, your mpg will take a 10-15% hit when you get the XT :-)

    As to the wide variations in mpg reported by different drivers, I gave up on trying to isolate why one person gets better mpg than another. There are just way too many possible variables. I do know that I've always gotten better than the EPA numbers on virtually every car I've owned so I'm assuming that driving style has to have something to do with it. Whatever the reason, I'm ecstatic with the last tankful @ 25mpg. I just hope I can keep it that high :-)

    -Frank P.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Plan on 20 mpg, then I doubt you'll be disappointed, especially once it's well broken in.

    Keep in mind most XTs are still very green. My mileage was 2mpg better at 15k miles than is was when new.

    -juice
  • ballisticballistic Member Posts: 1,687
    . My mileage was 2mpg better at 15k miles than is was when new.

    Or, maybe the new-car thrill wore off by then and you resumed driving normally instead of with a lead foot...
  • stuhallstuhall Member Posts: 59
    So, I've put in 3000 miles....my thoughts while trying not to rehash well worn subjects:

    Good
    -Great to drive (that says a lot)
    -Price/Performance (again, a rare combo)

    Bad
    -Dash so poorly designed that speedometer is dark in too many lighting conditions. That is a pathetic design element.
    -Ergonomics. I'm comfortable but....my leg is too close to the gas while my arm is too far from the top of the wheel. It doesn't come down far enough. Armrest (with and without extension) is a disaster
    -Auto climate = Auto Irritant

    So, my post is not overly wordy or specific. I think good speaks for itself. The bad is easier to specify and unfortunately a pretty big hit in my book. I never had a second thought about ergonomics in my honda. I'm trying to ignore them in my Forester.

    Overall, it's a fun ride but not quite the perfect piece of machinery I would have liked...but that 2005 Legacy GT might be.....of course when I'm zipping up and down hills in San Diego the bad points don't matter as much. I'm headed to the mountains this weekend so I'll have more feedback later.

    Anyone know of any mods to lighten up the speedo?
  • ballisticballistic Member Posts: 1,687
    Dash so poorly designed that speedometer is dark in too many lighting conditions.

    Agreed. Black-on-white would be much more readable in daylight than white-on-black.

    Ergonomics...my leg is too close to the gas while my arm is too far from the top of the wheel. It doesn't come down far enough.

    Definitely agree about the too-close gas pedal; when my seat's set for the right distance to fully depress the long-throw clutch, the throttle is too close for right-leg comfort. As for the steering wheel not coming down far enough, forgive the obvious suggestion, but have you tried raising the seat to the max? That's where mine is, and my steering wheel position is fine at about the middle of its vertical travel. I could move it farther down, but the rim would block the top of the speedometer.

    Armrest (with and without extension) is a disaster

    Agreed. How can it be so difficult to design a useable center armrest - right position, right height, and so forth? Maybe even itself adjustable.

    Auto climate = Auto Irritant

    It took me all of three or four days to give up on the automatic HVAC features and keep it in manual mode.
  • p0926p0926 Member Posts: 4,423
    Stu/Jack- I must have a higher tolerance level for bad ergonomics or something since I've not noticed any problems with the dash lighting, pedal position or the arm rest extension. But just to prove that everyone has a limit, the auto climate drives me batty! I'd be happy if I could just permanently turn it off but that's not an option and it's almost like it has an AI that's always looking for new ways to turn itself back on ;-)

    -Frank P.
  • samiam_68samiam_68 Member Posts: 775
    From what you read, it seems to me that there is no fan behind the temp sensor, the air just moves on its own - that tube is pointed upwards inside the dash, and I suspect the air flows in via natural "chimney" effect, which is very weak because the tube is less than 2 inches long. .02 inches and a piece of thread is supposed to move? That's not enough air movement to make the system adjust quickly enough to be comfortable. My Lexus has two of these sensors, but they seem to have fans, because you can hold a small piece of paper about a half inch from them, and the paper moves toward the sensor openings.
    I will tell you this, since I put that little fan over the senor, the cabin has become a total comfort zone, I haven't had to adjust anything on that climate control in 3 days.

    I have a picture of this mod, but don't know how to post it here - does anyone know how?
  • samiam_68samiam_68 Member Posts: 775
    March Car & Driver has a 5-Best Trucks article - Forester XT is one of them ;-)

    Good for resale value :-)
  • bsumpterbsumpter Member Posts: 35
    I definitely agree on the auto climate control being rather useless at least in the colder weather - mine also ends up staying on manual. It did a decent job in hot weather...

    Also agree on the throttle pedal position being too close when sitting so the clutch can be fully depressed. I've gotten used to it, same goes for the lack of a useful center armrest. When shopping for the FXT I also drove a WRX wagon - same issue with the clutch/gas pedal setup on it too, guess it's just a Subaru thing.

    Don't have any issues with panel lighting, or steering wheel height - unlike Jack, I'm sitting fairly low.
    Plenty of adjustment in all directions on the seat at least - unlike my wife's last two cars (Acura TL & Infiniti G35 Coupe), with power adjustable seats that don't go low enough to keep me from hitting my head unless tilting the seat back far more than I'd like.
  • cmunizcmuniz Member Posts: 604
    I found that if I keep the thermostat at 67 all the time in the winter it works for me under most conditions. If I keep it any warmer the interior gets too hot. As far as the rest of the "logic" it uses for vent control and fan speed I have no problem with it, On occasion I have to use the defroster on full blast for a few minutes, but most of the time I leave the controls alone on auto.
  • ballisticballistic Member Posts: 1,687
    My email address is fmp0926@yahoo.com

    I've now registered you on eighteen gazillion junkmail sources. Enjoy!
  • ballisticballistic Member Posts: 1,687
    Where's your sense of style and taste? Couldn't you at least have found a color-matched fan?

    Reminds me of my dad's 'creative' improvements.
  • andmoonandmoon Member Posts: 320
    Can you hear that fan?
    Don
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    I have about a dozen of those fans lying around, was wondering what I could do with them :-)

    Email Address Harvesting: How Spammers Reap What You Sow

    Better to mark your email public in your profile, but no guarantees there either.

    Steve, Host
  • ballisticballistic Member Posts: 1,687
    concern me less than impacts from various directions. IMO, many rollovers result from driver stupidity, and besides that, even when vehicles do roll, most injuries result when occupants aren't belted in. If everyone's wearing his/her belt, rollovers need not be traumatic.
  • lfdallfdal Member Posts: 679
    I think a good science project will be to install the fan behind the dash, splice in a molex connector or something similar and perhaps use a resistor or potentiometer to drop and/or control the fan speed.

    Can't wait for the warmer weather.....

    Larry
  • lfdallfdal Member Posts: 679
    Looked at the crash book for the 03-04 Forester and sure enough the 04 is unique. Looks like they went to composite arm and a composite wiper assy vs metal.

    By itself not a bad idea, but lets not make it a nonstandard mount.....

    Dealer of course was clueless as they're handing me a blade assy with the hook attachment - "That'll fit your car" - "No it won't" - "Yes it will" - "No it won't" - you get the idea.

    Now have one on order.

    If anyone wants me to post the official part numbers, let me know either here or via e-mail in my profile.

    Larry
  • once_for_allonce_for_all Member Posts: 1,640
    I personally don't like the AC coming on whenever a computer chip tells it to, especially when I know that the AC is being blended with engine heat. Bugs me to heck.

    I documented a 5 mpg AC hit when I drive home at the sweltering 105 degree temps we get here in summer. I did this by sweating for a week without AC and getting 28.5 mpg; with the AC on 50% time (no mornings, just afternoon) I get 26.0.

    Keep in mind, auto-clim all the time = lower mpg.

    John
  • once_for_allonce_for_all Member Posts: 1,640
    not being a turbo head, I want to know why the turbo engine can't be made using the NA compression ratio.

    It seems to me that if you get more efficient combustion at higher static compression, that is a good thing.

    Can't the waste gate be set to keep over-compression from happening on the high end?

    With premium "required", the static compression ratio for the turbo could be set even higher than the NA engine and still not have detonation problems.

    John
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    5 mpg A/C hit?

    That sounds like an anomaly.

    I've charted my mileage for years, a short while ago I took averages for each season. Winter took the biggest hit, I average 2 mpg less than I do in Spring and Fall. Summer came with a 1 mpg drop in mileage, for A/C.

    So reformulated fuels and cold weather actually hurt mileage more than having the A/C on all the time.

    -juice
  • corkfishcorkfish Member Posts: 537
    Subaru seems to score about the same as all the other SUVs or sport utes out there ( look at BMW X5). I do wish this thing was a couple inches lower and turned into a wagon.
  • overtime1overtime1 Member Posts: 134
    As far as I can tell the Forester has not been tested by the new dynamic rollover test. Those three stars are just a 'static' score that has been carried over from last year.

    I am curious to see how it handles the new test.

    overtime
  • once_for_allonce_for_all Member Posts: 1,640
    dunno about generalizing on the winter/summer fuels for all of USA. Here in the central valley of CA, I don't notice any difference in mpg or performance. Of course, we generally get weak blends all year, loaded with alcohol and MTBE. Nothing like the Starbucks variety prevalent elsewhere.

    John
  • njswamplandsnjswamplands Member Posts: 1,760
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    In MD we do get oxygenated fuels in the winter, sorry I should have mentioned that.

    -juice
  • samiam_68samiam_68 Member Posts: 775
    Don - if everything is turned off, i.e. the fan and radio, and you're at idle, yes you can barely hear the little fan, but you can always spend a couple of extra dollars and get a silent fan.

    Ballistic - if you're worried about the aesthetics, first, the black fan matches the black in the interior. Second, it can be spray painted any color you desire with spray enamel, Third, it's almost invisible in that little corner. Fourth, the benefit gained FAR outweighs any aesthetic considerations.

    Larry - I tried to install the fan behind the dash and/or behind the sensor, but that requires serious cutting and butchering up of the internals. With the velcro, it can be removed in minutes without a trace and no cutting was necessary. If you do succeed though, I'm very much interested in how you wind up doing it.

    Cheers :)
  • ballisticballistic Member Posts: 1,687
    ...why the turbo engine can't be made using the NA compression ratio. It seems to me that if you get more efficient combustion at higher static compression, that is a good thing. Can't the waste gate be set to keep over-compression from happening on the high end? With premium "required", the static compression ratio for the turbo could be set even higher than the NA engine and still not have detonation problems.

    Disclaimer: I'm no combustion engineer; far from it.

    Other things being equal, higher compression ratios are a good thing - but you can have too much of a good thing.

    Compression ratios as high as (or occasionally even above) 11.5:1 have been used in naturally-aspirated production high-performance street engines. The combustion pressures produced at these lofty levels require the highest-octane fuel available to slow down the flame front and avoid damaging detonation. Alternatively, the spark can be retarded, but beyond a certain point this becomes counter-productive from an efficiency standpoint.

    If an engine is to operate safely on lower-octane fuels, compression ratios necessarily must be reduced to prevent detonation.

    Adding forced induction is precisely equivalent to raising an engine's nominal compression ratio. Therefore, for any specific octane rating, a forced-induction engine's compression ratio must be reduced; the higher the boost pressure, the lower the C/R must be.

    The XT's max boost pressure is about 11.6 psi. This is almost 80% of one atmosphere, meaning that at max boost nearly 1.8 times as much air is being supplied to the cylinders than if the engine was naturally aspirated. Even with 91-octane fuel, the engine would detonate itself to death unless compression ratios were significantly lowered. If you divide an 11.5:1 high-performance NA compression ratio by 1.8, you get an equivalent forced-induction CR of about 6.4! The XT's 8.2:1 CR is actually on the high side.
This discussion has been closed.

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.