Did you recently rush to buy a new vehicle before tariff-related price hikes? A reporter is looking to speak with shoppers who felt pressure to act quickly due to expected cost increases; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com for more details by 4/24.
Subaru XT Turbo Forester
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
the black with gold flakes actually looks ok on an sti with the gold wheels. on every other car its a mistake. i think the silver should be darker too. maybe more like the passat.
Ken
I haven't gotten under an XT and looked around yet. I'm wondering if the HH ball valve machanism could be shimmed in back so that it tilted forward a few degrees. By varying the shims you could control when the HH system was activated. You could get really techie with it and mount the mechanism on a power mirror motor and vary it from the cockpit. I did this with a set of tweeters in a convertible once. It was the only way I could get it to sound good with the top up or down for long drives.
-Jim
the problems:
mounting something that depends on angle for its opeeration by one bolt is not sound engineering and i doubt that it was done this way. the brake lines may be hard lines and could make modifying the angle more difficult.
-jim
-juice
You'll never notice it on truly flat ground. However, it takes *very* little slope to bring the HH into engagement.
jb
I got a 16.009 @ 86.12 on a 2.460 short time.
I got a 16.005 @ 87.05 on a 2.469.
I got a 16.019 @ 86.41 on a 2.448.
I got a 16.047 @ 86.14 on a 2.442.
Not sure what "short time" means. The only modification in his car, are 225/55x16 Nito tires. So, I guess this is what the average guy can expect. I'd like to see what the average Joe could do with a 5-speed, and then compare that with the times from C&D's driving pros.
Bob
jb
jb
I can tell you one thing, the WRX feels faster. it probably is when comparing AT vs. MT. FWIW, there is no comparison in handling. The WRX will run rings around a Forester in every race but a straight line.
-B
I took the cross bars off the roof rails. It's very easy to do using the supplied torks head screwdriver. I think it looks better, (less mini-ute, more sports wagon). It also decreases the weight slightly and I think there is less wind noise on the highway. If I need to carry something on the roof I can install the cross bars in about 2 minutes. I got 22.9 mpg my last fill up and that included my acceleration testing.
By the way, I like the Hill Holder. It doesn't seem to require any extra clutch slipping to "break it loose".
-les
I've been rather vocal about this same issue. The regular Forester MT has 'only' about a 67% gap between 1st and 2nd (still rather large, IMO); the XT (and WRX) have a huge 77% gap. I haven't driven a car with such a large step between 1st and 2nd since my '57 VW Beetle. I don't like this aspect of the XT at all, and the only workaround I've found is to drive as if it's a 4-speed, using 2nd-through-5th for nearly all driving. I use 1st only when a second-gear start is impractical.
..."I took the cross bars off the roof rails."
Mine came off the day after I drove it home. I'll put them back on only when actually needed.
jb
On the HH in my '03 Forester, I see an additional control cable coming off the brake pedal (or it could be the clutch that has the linkage and extra cable, I will need to look again since I can't remember). The master cylinder gets the normal linkage, but there is this other cable that I haven't tracked down yet. I assumed that it was HH stuff, but the diagram doesn't show it at all.
John
Bob: those numbers translate to a 0-60 in the 7 second range, and that's for an automatic. I'm thinking the automatic gets a 4.11:1 final drive instead of the shorter gears on the 5 speed.
Still, that's about as quick as the 3.5l V6 Saturn Vue automatic, it's only real competitor.
-juice
John
I don't think so. However, the 4-speed automatic has considerably taller gear ratios in both first and top than the 5-speed manual, so it will behave as if it had a taller final drive even if it doesn't.
jb
My question is: I understand somewhat that with taller gear ratios then there would be higher rpm per gear, please correct me if I am wrong but seeing as I am a real newbie to cars and I just got my drivers licence and I was strongly recommended the Subaru Forester I was just wondering what your comment with a taller final drive means.
I was wondering if I should get the MT or AT but I am somewhat leaning towards the AT due to the fact that I want to install a amateur radio station into my car.
I live in Montreal, Canada so it will be great to use I think when all regular fwd and rwd cars are slip sliding away on snow and ice and I am planning on getting the XT so I can overtake cars and trucks without any problems.
Thanks for reading my first post here.
Sleepless
A taller ratio would mean the opposite - lower RPM at any given speed in any given gear. Taller = numerically lower; shorter = numerically higher. It's confusing, but a lower numerical final drive ratio, also referred to as a taller ratio translates to higher speeds for any given RPM. The same applies to individual transmission ratios. Other things being equal, a taller ratio and a slower-turning engine translates to reduced friction and usually produces improved fuel mileage, quieter highway cruising, and longer engine life. The Forester XT comes with an extremely 'short' final drive ratio, and its engine is buzzing along to maintain a given speed. 3,000 RPM on a 5-speed produces only about 68mph on a corrected speedometer. The automatic XT does a little better because its top gear is taller than the 5-speed's 5th gear.
jb
The XT has shorter gearing than the XS, and more power to go with it. That explains the astonishing jump from 9.5 seconds to 60 on the XS, to 5.3 seconds on the XT.
Well, partially. I think their XS sample was a bit green, their Legacy L took 8.8 seconds and it's heavier.
-juice
http://autos.canada.com/national/researching/roadtests.aspx?year=- 2179
feels more like a large-displacement V6, but retains four banger fuel economy.
That was a misprint; M/T mistakenly printed the same 0-60 time they had previously recorded in a prior test of the naturally-aspirated Forester.
After you drive both, you know immediately that they aren't even in the same universe, acceleration-wise...
jb
And, we just bought a CR-V.
7.0??? Actually, it's closer to 5.0 than 7.0. Car & Driver's August issue has a full XT test. They obtained 0-60 in 5.3.
jb
Not that we expect much accuracy from the guys that awarded Caprice COTY.
7 for the auto, sure, not the 5 speed. It's much quicker.
-juice
This is my first post and I'd like to know how much did you pay for your 2004 Forester XT & from where did you buy it ? Also I'd like to know what is major difference between 2004 & 2003 Forester ?
thanks in advance
MJ
At least the roof can withstand 150% of the car's weight, it's a car safety standard that the Baja meets, and most crew cab trucks don't (at least they are not required to).
Also, the Baja is less likely to roll than any 4WD truck I can think of, FWIW.
MJ: 2004s got cloth sun visors, deleted the cassette player, and got collapseable pedals for major front impacts. The XT model is new for 2004.
-juice
I was probably the first Oregon purchaser of a 5-speed XT, from a dealer in Beaverton (just west of Portland). My total price was $23,978. That included everything I selected: two popular equipment groups at $177 and $145 (mudguards, bumper cover, air filter, cargo tray, armrest extension), plus column-mount boost gauge at $200 and rubber mats at $33 (all at cost) and nothing I didn't want (like the pointless, expensive rear spoiler), plus $100 over invoice.
jb
I don't think C&D conducts slalom tests. If they did, I don't see the result.
rmtrader says, "On it's side....or roof."
Spoilsport!
jb
I think you will find a lot of variation depending on where you live and what you are looking for. I live in Asheville, NC, which has the highest per capita Subaru ownership in the US, even more than Vermont :-),closer to 5% rather than .5% of new car sales and climbing every year...we have 3 local subaru dealers in a population center of less than 200,000. In the XT, my local dealers are getting lots of AT's with the standard interior, and they are selling those around $300 over invoice without much haggling. the XT with the Premium package is kinda rare in these parts, and the dealers are holding closer to MSRP, at least as an opening gambit. The MT is also not as common as the AT, esp in a color anybody wants, so they are at least asking for a little more profit. I am not seeing any gouging, though.
thanks
MJ
I am kind of between the Forester XT and an Acura TSX. Totally separate categories, I know. The forester just seems so much more practical as I am into camping and plan on eventually hauling a sea kayak and/or windsurfer around.
Anyway, since you can't purchase the MT with the leather interior and sunroof, I am wondering about the quality of the cloth interior that you are forced to get with the MT. I have nothing against cloth interior, but I am hoping it is high quality and nice looking!
Thanks in advance!
For the MT Car-videos.com (http://www.car-videos.com/performance/view.asp?id1=277&id2=0- ) gives acceleration times that are about the same as those reported by Car and Driver. The 0-30 time is slower, which makes sense. It's hard to understand why Car and Driver's 0-40 time is twice its 0-30 time.
For the WRX Car-videos.com shows an 0-60 time about 1 second slower for the AT than the MT. What's interesting is that the WRX AT is slower to 30 but faster to 40 than the WRX MT. I imagine the differences between the XT MT and AT are about the same. That would mean that the AT does 0-60 in less than 6.5 seconds.
What are the pros and cons between the different 4WD systems on the MT and AT? Does the complexity of the AT system offer any additional benefits?
I have also requested price quotes by email from various dealers in Northern California without mentioning the VIP program, and their internet "no haggle" pricing seems to hover around $1000 over invoice (again, this is for the XT Premium). No need to pay MSRP through CarsDirect, IMHO.
Those times are close to what we have seen before. The Alabama track times are interesting. I wonder how the XT would do on 17" rims with sticky tires & stiffer sway bars.
The difference between the AT and MT AWD has been discussed numerous times here and elsewhere, do a google search. In a biased nutshell, the MT's advantage is 50:50 from the outset (less likely to get into trouble), consistent and predictive behavior, but no pro-active re-distribution. The AT primarily uses acceleration to try to distribute the power, but [according to SoA, for the Forester's cheap, non-VDC/VTD AT AWD] starts at 90:10 - almost FWD, because unlike the MT version, it does not have a center differential, and thus relies on a clutch pack - that necessarily and essentially operates in on-off mode.
What's my bias? You guessed it.
- D.
Its nice to see that somone in this group is using same VIP program that I'm planning to use. Could you let us know what is invoice price ? And what all options you are selecting ?
Thanks
MJ
On the MT, torque re-distributes to wheel(s) with grip when slip occurs, whereas on the AT torque re-distribute when impending slip is sensed - it's proactive, you may say, versus the MT reactive
Either works seamlessly.
Also, the AT (Non-VTD) is 80:20 split but starts off with 50:50 distribution during acceleration.
-Dave
I may be misunderstanding your question, but any of a number of Internet sites can provide exact dealer invoice prices, including the invoice price for any options you might desire. These sites include Edmunds.com, carsdirect.com, kelleybluebook.com, and many others.
jb
http://wheels.mainetoday.com/resources/030711forester.shtml
It contains the following line that interested me:
"Premium unleaded gasoline is recommended for best performance, but regular unleaded also works fine."
This is the first mention I've seen in print that the XT might be able to operate safely on much-cheaper regular gas.
I very much dislike paying substantially more for premium. For normal day-to-day driving, I'd rather trade off a little of my XT's unexpectedly strong acceleration in exchange for the cheaper price of regular gas - IF I could be certain that the engine can readjust itself to the lower octane grade without harmful detonation. Providing that no engine damage would result, the slight reduction in acceleration and MPG would be much more than offset by the 15% to 20% drop in fuel cost.
When I said a month or so ago that I intended to experiment with successively lower-octane (cheaper) grades of fuel, another contributor whose name I've forgotten wrote that the XT ECU has a very limited range of spark-advance adjustment. He said that the range would be insufficient to accomodate 87 or even 89-octane gas, and that destructive detonation would definitely occur if those fuels were used.
Are there any bona fide Subaru technicians in the audience who can authoritatively say (backed up with citations) whether or not the automotive writer cited above is correct in saying that 'regular gas also works fine' in an XT? I'm seeking facts, not opinions.
jb
I believe the base invoice price for the XT premium model is $25,062 (IIRC, it's $23,727 for the XT 5MT).
I'm adding the auto-dimming mirror, security system upgrade, and the package including mud guards, rear bumper cover and cargo tray (<-- worth its weight in gold if you have a pooch). I may also add the armrest extension and rear spoiler. Under the condition that I can get all of the above options port-installed and thus at invoice price as well, it brings my grand total to $26,342 incl. destination charge, approx. $2900 under MSRP. Well worth the IMBA membership fees :-)
I've never checked the premium, but the base invoice price for an XT 5-speed, including destination charge, is $23,323.
jb