Subaru XT Turbo Forester

pleiad7

jb - Oops, I stand corrected! Just checked again here on Edmunds and saw that they had added "typical options" to the price I quoted.

ballistic

"they had added "typical options" to the price I quoted."

Note to Edmunds: I've encountered this, too, and it's a dumb way to display prices. It's confusing and unnecessary. Do what all the other sites do: Start with BASIC, unadorned MSRP and invoice pricing, and then let the user add individual options to arrive at a fully-configured price. I have no idea why Edmunds - and Edmunds alone - takes this oddball, obscure approach.

jb

tidester

Please use the feedback form!

tidester, host

ateixeira

I really like the fabric they used on the XT. It's nicer than the stuff in the XS, much nicer than the stuff in the X.

It looks very durable. Also, things like the arm rests are black, so it will show less wear and tear than the light gray ones on the XS.

0-60 in 5.25? C&D's was slow! LOL

For fun, I compared it to the S2000. The XT is quicker up until 90mph, then the S2000 takes over. I guess the aerodynamics come into play at that speed.

-juice

twrx

Subartu does a great job with cloth. I had a '98 Forester L. Although the pattern of the cloth was truly ugly it was very durable. After 4 years when I traded it in it was absolutely perfect, no stains and no rips or wear. I now have a WRX. Comments were made about the fabric lookning "thin". After 2 years it is 100% perfect. Also it has a very modern and tasteful look. I've noticed Subaru in recent years has gotten away from some of its earlier wierd fabric patterns.
TWRX

ateixeira

I have a '98 Forester L also, and yes, it's in great shape. I have two kids and a dog that tends to get car sick, so yeah, I'm happy with it.

The XT's fabric looks and feels a lot different, but I actually like it better. The seats are better too, but I wish you could still adjust the angle of the seat base.

-juice

once_for_all

you rationalize yourself into an XT purchase :-)

John

ballistic

Juice says, "I really like the fabric they used on the XT. It's nicer than the stuff in the XS,"

True, but I'm still unconvinced that the combination of black and grey looks better than the XS all-grey.

Also, things like the arm rests are black, so it will show less wear and tear"

But why cover the tops of armrests with cloth?! It's hard for me to believe that they won't be the first thing that wears out.

jb

leo2633

There has been a lot of discussion of the gear ratios on the new XT 5 MT. It seems Subaru has used shorter gearing to help with performance, to the detriment of fuel economy. I was wondering what you guys would figure a NA 2.5 Forester's performance numbers would be with the XT's gear ratios. No, I'm not considering a swap (no wrecked XTs yet!), just curious as to what the NA Forester might do, besides sucking more gas and running higher, noiser RPMs on the highway.

Len

ballistic

"just curious as to what the NA Forester might do, besides sucking more gas and running higher, noiser RPMs on the highway."

As a rough approximation, the XT's 7.5% shorter (higher numerical) 4.44 final drive, if installed in an X/XS instead of the 4.11, would result in perhaps 4% stronger acceleration. You would not get the entire 7.5% gain because the faster-turning engine also generates more horsepower-consuming friction, which offsets some of the leverage advantage of the shorter gearing.

So, if a 4.11 X/XS reached 60 in 9.0 seconds, the 4.44 gearing might get it there in 8.6 to 8.7. This, too, might not be attained, because a time-consuming upshift that previously occurred just after 60mph (or any other specific speed) might now occur just below it.

jb

fryingbologna

Had a look at the XT for the first time today (no time for a test drive) and it looks great! Have not seen one on the road up here in the Great White North yet, but looking forward to that day!

I did have time to take out a Nissan Murano (I've test driven a Forester XS already - relax!), and the salesman at Nissan claimed to be an ex-mechanic from the Subaru dealership I just came from! I believe him, as he dropped all the right names, and came across as pretty positive about Subaru vehicles. He did tell me to stay away from the XT, however, based on what he saw in the shop as the turbos greatly increased the wear on their engines. He told me to check around and see if any WRX owners are having problems yet. Opinions on this statement?

allhorizon

Opinions on this statement?

A male bovine with pronounced bony processes.

[Try to look up Subaru's history on turbos].

- D.

rochcom

To ballistic:
I owned a Saab Turbo with the SPG package. The standard turbo required premium fuel, and the higher output SPG engine (with some additional owner added modifications) certainly did. But, I often ran it on regular around town and had no problems because the knock sensor just dialed back the boost pressure to accommodate the lower octane fuel. As long as the engine management system can compensate, there should be no damage to the engine.

But, if you plan to try this, you might want to put a few gallons of regular in a nearly empty tank. If you hear knocking or pinging when the engine is heavily loaded, such as accelerating up hill, then fill the rest with premium. One possible problem is that the Subaru digital engine management system apparently takes a while to adjust to fuel quality, so the immediate effect may not be the lasting one.
The Saab's control system (this was a 1990 model)was a much simpler one than on current models.

ateixeira

I need all the help I can get! )

I may be in the minority, but I think the black/gray looks very classy, upscale. I like it.

They say a shift adds 0.3 seconds. But still, I bet an XS with the shorter final drive would chop off half a second to 60, about.

That mechanic probably worked on late 80s Subaru turbos, which were very different. Even the 1st generation Legacy turbos were reliable, so anything after 1990 or so, especially on the newer platforms (Legacy, Impreza, and now Forester) should be good.

I do recommend an extended warranty for everyone, and here's why. Someone reported paying $700 for a 7/70 Gold with $0 deductible. You might get a 100k one for under a grand if you shop.

Consider that you get 4 more years of roadside assistance, bumper to bumper coverage, service loaner guaranteed, better resale value, OE part replacement, etc.

My dad was offered a renewal on his roadside assistance (his Outback is 3 years old), and that alone was $72 per year. So that would cost $288 right there.

-juice

corkfish

I didn't get the extended warranty, but I did get the Subaru credit card which gives you back 3%. I figure I'll self insure to some degree that way.

http://www.car-videos.com/performance/view.asp?id1=277&id2=0

ballistic

rochcom reports, "often ran it on regular...knock sensor just dialed back the boost pressure to accommodate the lower octane fuel. As long as the engine management system can compensate, there should be no damage to the engine."

I agree - the ECU should either reduce boost pressure or retard timing (or both) whenever detonation is sensed, and those automatic responses ought to be sufficient to accomodate lower-octane fuel, albeit with reduced performance and MPG.

The correspondent who earlier warned me against trying 89 or 87-octane in my XT asserted that its ECU lacked enough range in its ability to retard timing, and that the engine would be jeopardized. He didn't mention anything about also reducing boost. I think maybe he was being a bit alarmist.

jb

ace1000

Thanks for the comments on the MT and AT AWD systems.

I've had the same experience as rochcom with a 1995 Volvo 850 turbo wagon. The owner's manual said to use premium but regular 87 octane was okay. We've been using regular for 145,000 miles because my wife and teenage son are too cheap to use premium, and the engine still runs like it's new. We start out in the morning going up a big hill for a couple of miles, and there has been no problem with knocking. We did try a few tanks of premium but did not notice any significant increase in performance or gas mileage. If the owner's manual says that 87 octane can be used, then it should be okay. We have saved about $1400 using regular, which will more than pay for a new turbo when it fails.

The Auto, Motor & Sport program from Europe that is shown on public TV had a segment this week on fuel octane. Higher octane fuels increased torque by 5% but didn't change gas mileage. This has been my experience with three turbocharged cars. Regular gas may reduce horsepower slightly by reducing torque but hasn't reduced gas mileage.

I test drove an XT AT, and it is definitely faster than my Volvo, which the 1995 Consumer Reports test reported as having a 0-60 time of 7.2 seconds. This was the point I was trying to make in my previous message. The AT may accelerate much faster to 60 than 7 seconds.

We love our Volvo. Even my teenage son prefers it to almost every other car he has driven. I really like the stock wheels and performance tires. We even painted the calipers red, and I still get compliments from others on how good the car looks. However, the XT appears to be so good in comparison to the competition, including Volvo, that we are considering giving the Volvo to my son and replacing it with an XT.

jason_els

I own a '92 9000 and the manual states that while 91 or higher is recommended, one could use 89 without a problem. I've never put lower than 89 in. The Saab ECU seems to compensate without a problem as I've never heard knocking no matter how severe the load. Subaru does not seem to be so forgiving.

An XT is going to be more expensive all around no matter what you do. Certainly it is important to consider gas prices but where I live premium is around $.25 more than regular. Based on my average weekly driving, on a 13 gallon fill that's $3.25 more per week, $169 a year. Not a whole lot. Repairing the car for detonation damage would immediately be far more.

ballistic

juice says, "I do recommend an extended warranty for everyone,..."

Loosely speaking, these are insurance policies. The acid test for any category of insurance is to compare the discounted net present value of premium dollars collected (up front!) from customers) to the discounted net present value of claims paid back out to them years later (thus worth far less in present value terms). A large surplus of NPV collections over NPV payouts tells me that the insurance is overpriced and NOT a good deal for the average buyer - in exactly the same way that playing a slot machine when the odds are 90-10 in favor of the house is not a wise investment.

Auto extended warranties are among the highest profit margin policies in the entire insurance industry. They also are extraordinarily profitable for the dealerships that promote them. Taking those two facts into account, what does that tell you about the likelihood (or lack thereof) that you'll come out ahead by buying one?

Unless peace of mind is extremely valuable to you, you're better off just saying no.

jb

ballistic

Corkfish says, "I figure I'll self insure to some degree that way."

Very wise decision.

jb

ateixeira

I used to think that way, but check out parts prices nowadays, especially OE parts.

Our Mazda 626 was unreliable, and that's probably what converted me. We spent a whopping $2500 in repairs in years 5-7, which an extended warranty would have covered.

For instance: $92 for an hour of labor just to check the codes on the check engine light. $820 for the wheel bearing on the 626. Another $900 for the axle and boot (different wheel).

And you have to take into consideration the roadside assistance. Unless you already have AAA and use its other benefits, that's a plus. Maybe not so much for me, but for my wife, who carries 2 kids in the car and would be afraid to break a nail changing a flat...

When we bought our Legacy, we dropped AAA and that right there saves us $497 over the 7 year period of the warranty. Ours is a 7/100 so we plan on selling it after 6.5 years or maybe 95k miles or so, and that helps resale since the new buyer gets the tail end of the warranty. So we make some money back, at least a couple hundred.

Plus piece of mind.

All that if we never make a single claim.

I think there are other ways to hedge your bets (like the Subaru Bucks - great idea), and if you like to fix cars and buy parts from wholesalers, then maybe that's a different story.

-juice

smo615

One way to get a leather interior with a MT is to add the leather as an after market add on. My dealer will give you any color leather for about 1K.

ateixeira

Yeah, any good upholstery shop.

I've seen the Katskins leather kit in a Forester, and it looked great. Felt better then the OE stuff, though the fit on the OE is very slightly better.

Overall I'd rate them about the same.

-juice

kullenberg

I have to weigh in with Jack on this one. I think you are much better off self insuring. In the last year of the OEM warranty, I start putting away $100 or so a month, in savings towards repairs. If I keep the car for 6 years, then I build up $3600 towards repairs. If I don't use it, I can put it towards the next vehicle; plus, show me an extended warranty that pays you interest, or gives you your money back, if you don't use it!
Cheers
Pat

ateixeira

But what I'm saying is, even if you don't use it, you do benefit from it.

Have you never locked your keys in your car, or ran out of gas? Got a flat?

If you sell within 7 years it also affects resale.

Saving up $3600 is great, but the warranty doesn't cost that much so it's not really relevant. You could save it up anyway, and know for certain you'd have your next down payment.

I'm not saying it's for everyone, but ask someone that had a failed rear wheel bearing or a blown head gasket if they think it's a good idea. We're talking one instance to pay off that warranty.

-juice

ballistic

Juice says, "I'm not saying it's for everyone, but ask someone that had a failed rear wheel bearing or a blown head gasket"

It's critical, when evaluating insurance purchases (especially extended warranties, where you pay big bucks out up front on day 1, and where the repayments occur years down the road - if ever), to take present value concepts into account. Even when you have repair bills that are covered by the extended warranty, they occur years out in the future. A dollar paid out today to buy the policy is worth much more than a dollar you get back 6 or 7 years from now.

Without question, there are buyers of extended warranties who collect more future dollars than they initially paid for the warranty. But - when you discount everything back to today to get an apples-to-apples comparison, far fewer of them get more back in value than the cost. And for every one of those people, there are five or ten who don't come anywhere close to an even exchange.

So you simply cannot make these decisions on the basis that a few people actually happened to do better with the expensive extended warranty than without. You also have to consider the much larger number of people for whom the reverse is true. In other words, it's a pure probability analysis. And for the large majority of new car buyers, the probability is that extended warranties will cost MUCH more, in today's dollars, than the present value of whatever future benefits they'll provide.

That, my friend, is a fact.

jb

pleiad7

All of you bring up good points in regards to the extended warranty. When I bought my 2000 OBS I added the 6 yr./80K mi. Gold Plus plan because I had just come from a bad experience with a Mitsu Eclipse that I owned before the Subie. I was convinced that the extended warranty was a good idea and that it was better to be safe than sorry once again.

After 3 years of ownership of the Subie, I have to say that I have never even once made a factory warranty claim. The car has held up so well that normally I probably wouldn't even consider the extended plan again for a new Subaru.

I agree that the roadside assistance is handy to have, but my husband still has to pay for his own AAA coverage for his Toyota truck since the Subaru plan doesn't apply here.

Also, I'm not really sure how much of a selling point the balance of the extended warranty will really be, since the used car market is terribly sluggish right now and people seem to be mostly looking for bargains; I was told to not even bother listing my OBS at an asking price higher than KBB minus $500, even with warranty.

On the other hand, I've never owned a turbo car before and I understand that there will be higher wear and tear on engine and drivetrain components. Maybe the extended warranty makes more sense here, especially considering that the XT is only in its first year of production and there will undoubtedly be "bugs" that need to be worked out...

ateixeira

Jack: you are absolutely right. But my interest checking is paying 0.4% right now. Not exactly mind-boggling interest, eh? ;-)

Even if you finance the warranty, what is the rate now, 0.9%?

Go read General Maintenance & Repair, then tell Steve what you're telling me. Gasket issues still exist on some of the 2.5l engines. The 2.2l and the EZ30 series do not have the problem.

Subaru sells warranties and surely averages out the costs of repairs across all models, but if the 2.5l tends to cost more to repair and/or has more problems, you might come out ahead even on average. In other words, an extended warranty is a better value on the 2.5l models vs. the 2.2l or 3.0l models.

I've followed Subarus closely for 5 years. 95-99 2.5l engines had gasket failures. They happen at lower rates now, but I still don't think the issue is completely resolved. Foresters up until 2002 and Imprezas up until 2001 also had rear wheel bearing failures. The new ones are sorted out, which is good.

But if you buy a used '01 Forester, succeptible to both of those problems, I think the gamble might be not getting a warranty.

I'm just playing devil's advocate here. The XT has the STi's semi-closed block and forged pistons, and I bet the gaskets are different than the ones on the XS.

-juice

ballistic

Juice points out, "my interest checking is paying 0.4% right now. Not exactly mind-boggling interest, eh? ;-) Even if you finance the warranty, what is the rate now, 0.9%?"

You're correct: Current SHORT-term interest rates are at remarkably low levels. Even mid-term rates are low. If these rates could be projected to remain at these low levels, net-present-value calculations would certainly be affected, in that future dollars would not be so greatly discounted to equate them with today's dollars.

However, the interest rate climate will change, and it's far more likely that rates will rise over the next 5 to 7 years than that they will plummet further. And one would not perform NPV calculations using today's checking-account or promotional auto-loan rates anyway. You'd use typical mid-term rates - not today's short-term ones. Therefore, the thrust of my comments about extended warranties remain valid.

Without doubt there are some car lines that have worse repair records than others. Extended warranties might make more sense on the former, even if they'd be a waste of money on the latter. The problem with that is, the manufacturer's warranty (5 years/60K miles for Subaru) takes care of a lot. Whose crystal ball is clear enough today to predict whether a particular model will incur excessive repairs that far down the line, AFTER the primary warranty expires? Not mine! Only by being able to do that can you logically defy the heavy probabilities against coming out ahead with expensive extended warranties.

jb

ateixeira

True, the gaskets are covered by the 5/60, so a 7/70 doesn't really buy you much protection there.

You keep calling them "expensive". I've seen some quotes as high as $1300, but $700 IMO is not expensive.

-juice

kens

jb,

Do I sense formal financial training up your sleeve? It's not everyday that I hear someone talking about NPV.

I do agree that from a pure financial standpoint assuming a risk-neutral investor, an extended warranty on average is going to cost more than had one invested the same amount of money and kept it aside for repair costs. After all, the extended warranty is a profit-generating product and Subaru would not offer it if it were a money losing proposition (ie. on average repair costs exceed the price of the warranty)! There are opportunity costs of paying for the warranty up front as well.

However, the key word is risk-neutral. The extended warranty is a great product for those who are risk-averse or don't want to deal with managing a separate fund for repairs. I'm sure that a big purchase like a new vehicle would tend to sway people to which ever side of risk-neutrality they stand on. It's also convenient since the cost of the warranty can be added on to your car payments.

The advice I give to people who are thinking about getting extended warranties with their brand-new Subarus is to WAIT. You can purchase an extended warranty at any time during your original factory B2B warranty. The first three years of maintenance can provide insight into future performance. Also, since the extended warranty doesn't kick in until the B2B is over, you don't lose the opportunity cost of handing over Subaru your money.

Ken

ballistic

Juice says, "You keep calling them "expensive". I've seen some quotes as high as $1300, but $700 IMO is not expensive."

I guess everything's relative. If I pay $10 for something that only gives me back $5 in benefits, I call it expensive. That's why people call me a cheapskate. I prefer 'frugal'.

jb

ballistic

Ken writes, "Do I sense formal financial training up your sleeve? It's not everyday that I hear someone talking about NPV."

Guilty. CPA. With me, everything's about the numbers.

..."the extended warranty is a profit-generating product and Subaru would not offer it if it were a money losing proposition"

Exactly. In a few cases, Subaru (and other extended-warranty vendors) will lose money - meaning the customer will come out ahead. In most cases, the reverse will be true, or else the issuers would all go broke. Subaru already made enough profit off me when I bought my XT; I don't feel inclined to boost their bottom line even further by purchasing a high-margin extended warranty.

..."The extended warranty is a great product for those who are risk-averse"

True. People differ in their tolerance for risk. For some, volatile Nasdaq stocks are perfect. Others can't sleep at night unless they're in rock-solid Treasuries or CDs. For them, freedom from worry or unexpected surprises is everything. They're the candidates for extended warranties, even with the near-certainty that they'll pay more for the warranty than for the possible distant-future repairs it might eventually cover.

..."It's also convenient since the cost of the warranty can be added on to your car payments."

At today's rates, that's relatively painless. Go back to when when auto financing rates were in the teens, and it's a whole different ballgame.

..."WAIT. You can purchase an extended warranty at any time during your original factory B2B warranty. The first three years of maintenance can provide insight into future performance. Also, since the extended warranty doesn't kick in until the B2B is over, you don't lose the opportunity cost of handing over Subaru your money."

For those who really, really want the extended warranty protection, this is exactly what I recommend. You'll be in a far better position four or five years from now, based on your actual experience with the car up to that point, to evaluate the probabilities that your particular vehicle will be expensively unreliable. If (after four or five years of driving) it has given no such indications, spend your money on something else that's more likely to actually pay off.

jb

once_for_all

that it is a numbers game. However, when there is no track record on something (eg., a new turbo engine, a new emissions system, a new auto tranny, etc.) there are educated guesses that go on regarding problem rates and how much should be charged for extended warranties. When did subie get a clue on its bad clutch and gaskets on the 2.5l? Only after introduction. If you had bought the extended warranty in anticipation of these details with the XT, the extended warranty might just be a bargain compared to its cost after these problems surface. Kind of like getting a multiyear house insurance policy prior to 9/11 and all the mold issues that come up.

John

ballistic

John says, "...the extended warranty might just be a bargain compared to its cost after these problems surface."

The key word is 'might'. The warranty sellers have squads of experienced, professional analysts whose job is to evaluate the probabilities, and the warranties are priced to nearly always yield a profit. You, the customer, are betting against the house. The house stacks the odds heavily in its favor. Just as in Vegas, a few bettors will beat the odds. The rest will lose.

The winners will gladly proclaim how well things turned out; it's a way of saying, "look how shrewd I was." Few of the latter will want to admit that they were had, and some won't even realize it.

That's why I take the occasional glowing reports of favorable extended-warranty outcomes with a large grain of salt.

jb

kullenberg

Jack, if you're on ; come join the chat on Edmunds

p0926

Well I've expressed my opinion on this subject before (I'm a believer in self-insuring) so I won't repeat myself. However, I'm past 53k on my 01 Forester and have yet to need any repairs (Note to Juice- no head gasket or wheel bearing issues either). In addition, I've also never had the need to avail myself of the roadside assistance (knock on wood for both).

I think it's far too easy to be subconsciously influenced by all the talk of problems on these boards while all the owners who are happy and trouble free seldom posts messages to that effect.

-Frank P.

ateixeira

NPV, sure, what really happens is you take that extra $700 to VEGAS BABY and come home with a hang over! LOL

How many of us are really disciplined enough to invest it! Just you. 1% maybe.

So, let's do a real financial analysis. If you keep the money, 99% of you lose it all in Vegas, and 1% (i.e. Jack) invests brilliantly. At the end of 7 years, he has $1200, and his car was perfect. So that's +$500.

But on average, that a loss of $688 because 99% of folks blow it one some useless frill.

Those that get the extended warranty instead average $400 in repairs, an average loss of $300.

SEE!? Scientific fact! You are better off with a warranty.

;-)

-juice

ballistic

Juice says, "SEE!? Scientific fact! You are better off with a warranty."

Completely unable to overcome any of that impeccable logic, I'm heading straight back to my dealer! If I take him a box of candy and ask real nice, do you suppose he'd be willing to sell me five extended warranty plans for my XT? After all, if one is better than none, then two must be better than one, and so forth... (-;

jb

once_for_all

Jack says, "The winners will gladly proclaim how well things turned out; it's a way of saying, "look how shrewd I was." Few of the latter will want to admit that they were had, and some won't even realize it.". I have no problem confessing to the 7/70k for $750. I believe the subie with its AWD warrants it. Just think, your repair cost at $50+ hour now might be $100+ hour in 5 years with worker's comp and other issues busting our behinds.

Further, we bought an '02 Mazda MPV and didn't get any extended warranty. Why? The vehicle is not as -potentially- as expensive to maintain as the Forester. Good investment or not? Frankly, I don't care. I would be extremely pleased to go 7 years without any problem.

John

p0926

You can rationalize spending money on a extended warranty any way you want. The bottom line is buying one is the equivalent of betting against the house in Las Vegas (I.e. some will win but most will lose).

However, if you have a low risk tolerance, then go ahead and get one and sleep better at night.

-Frank P.

akasrp

I emailed SOA re the gas issue. They reply:

Thank you for visiting the Subaru Web site and for your interest in Subaru products. The engine in the 2004 Forester XT is designed to operate using premium unleaded gasoline with an octane rating of 91 AKI or higher. Regular unleaded gasoline with an octane rating of 87 AKI may be used if necessary. For optimum engine performance and driveability, it is recommended that you use premium grade unleaded gasoline.

-srp

ballistic

John: To my comment, "Few of the latter will want to admit that they were had, and some won't even realize it."

...you replied, "I have no problem confessing to the 7/70k for $750. I believe the subie with its AWD warrants it."

That's not quite what I meant. When I say 'few will want to admit they were had', I'm not talking about today, when you initially invest in your extended warranty purchase. I'm talking about 7 or 8 years from now, when it expires and you finally have the full knowledge necessary to evaluate whether your earlier investment in the plan actually paid you back more than you spent (in constant inflation-adjusted dollars) - or not. Those who came out well with their extended warranties are the people we're most likely to hear from, because they'll be happy to talk about their excellent decision. Those who would have been much better off by NOT buying one are far less likely to say so, because to do so would be to admit they wasted their money on it. They are the 'silent majority'...

jb

ballistic

akasrp reports: "...Regular unleaded gasoline with an octane rating of 87 AKI may be used if necessary. For optimum engine performance and driveability, it is recommended that you use premium grade unleaded gasoline."

Thanks! That's exactly what I was seeking: Official, reliable affirmation that using less-than-91 octane fuel, while not recommended for performance and driveability reasons, will NOT produce engine-destroying detonation. Otherwise, Subaru would say so. This response tells me that the ECU is indeed capable of adjusting spark timing and other parameters to suit the lower-grade fuels, albeit with lower performance, all the way down to and including standard regular unleaded.

The extent to which lower-octane fuel actually and noticably degrades performance and driveability is yet to be discovered. So, I'll now begin experimenting with less-costly 89 and 87-octane gas to ascertain for myself which grade of fuel still lets my XT deliver acceptably-high performance while moderating its operating cost.

jb

jim_loves_cars

It is done! I have created a board for Forester XT vs. the Wrx Wagon so us subie lovers have a place to get together and obsess over which of these turbocharged beauties is best.

For me, it the WRX, for you...

jim_loves_cars "Subaru Forester XT vs. WRX Wagon" Jul 18, 2003 1:02pm

-jim

ateixeira

A 7/100 warranty is plenty. After that you'll want the new 300hp Forester STi. ;-)

Frank: I disagree. I think you are the house, and you're betting against having perfect luck, since reliability varies from vehicle to vehicle. Perhaps the gamblers tend to win at this "house", but the extended warranty reduces risk, not the other way around.

Put differently, you could end up with a $2000 gasket leak, or several smaller problems. Buy a warranty and you know the costs up front.

So 87 is OK, but they still recommend higher octane.

Hey, there's another gamble. Pay more up front, or risk detonation issues down the road.

I'd stick with premium, Jack is going to try 89. Sounds familiar doens't it? :-)

-juice

once_for_all

at the human condition. Those of us with the NA engine discuss how to improve performance, while those with the Turbo discuss how to reduce performance, increase mpg with different driving techniques and gear ratios, and lower fuel costs by purchasing regular.

Aren't we interesting? I don't know if we ever reach the "satisfied" state.

John

ateixeira

I want 300hp and 30mpg. Maybe 40mpg. Then I'll be happy.

As long as they make the gas tank a little bigger too. And the XT 5 speed gets a moonroof. And Subaru matches Hyundai's warranty. And it's transferable.

That's all. :-)

-juice

corkfish

Does Subaru make seat covers for the XT? If not, can anyone suggest a make that fits well.

jaserb

I just finished reading the wrapup of the One Lap of America in the latest C&D. They mentioned that the competition in the SUV/Pickup class was remarkably weak - their Cayenne Turbo and an early 90's S10 Blazer with a Corvette powertrain were the main competitors. So, I figure somebody has GOT to take an XT 5-spd, throw in some STi suspension and possibly engine pieces, maybe re-chip it and clean up in One Lap. <evil cackle...>

Alas, if I'm to remain married it won't be me. But it'll be interesting to see if anyone else has the same idea.

-Jason