Subaru XT Turbo Forester

18586889091131

Comments

  • p0926p0926 Member Posts: 4,423
    Forester is still classified as a car so factory tint isn't an option.

    Naming brands, models, manufacturers or dealers is okay but naming individuals usually isn't.

    -Frank
  • frankiextfrankiext Member Posts: 6
    The name of the tint manufacturer is LLUMAR window films. The model name is Llumastar and specifically; ATR charcoal is what is on my car windows. 1800-255-8627 should help you find a professional that uses llumastar products in your area, Mr Oregon.
  • miamixtmiamixt Member Posts: 600
    let's pause from Window Tinting and MPG for just a Minute to review the August edition of Turbo Magazine. There you will see the most amazing Java Pearl Black XT, modified by the same team in California who built a 500 HP Subaru Baja.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Manufacturer names are fine. We frown on salespeople's names being posted in here, because that encourages shill posts. See the Rules of the Road linked above for the skinny. And welcome to Town Hall!

    Steve, Host
  • bluesubiebluesubie Member Posts: 3,497
    Amazing with the exception of the wheels. It is indeed the King of Bling!

    -Dennis
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    with all the hoopla surrounding the new turbo Legacy GT/Outback XT, that no F-XT owners here have checked one out yet. JB, Frank, Loosh, others... We would be interested to get your feedback, and how it compares to your F-XTs.

    My recollection of the F-XT, and my recent drives of the new Legacy suggests that the engines feels quite similar to one another. Since you guys are so much more familiar with the F-XT than I, your input would be most welcome.

    Bob
  • bluesubiebluesubie Member Posts: 3,497
    ".. with all the hoopla surrounding the new turbo Legacy GT/Outback XT, that no F-XT owners here have checked one out yet..."

    That's because NJ is the last state in the country to get GT's/OBXT's! SDC I suppose.

    My wife and I are thinking of going to the dealer "unveiling". I think it's next Friday. If I can't give it a good test drive then, I'll go back again for a "good" one.

    -Dennis
  • pon1pon1 Member Posts: 196
    Seconded

    JP
  • p0926p0926 Member Posts: 4,423
    Bob- Now that I've got the $25 gift card offer you can be sure I'll be going for a test drive. I'm not only going to compare the performance between the XTs but will also take a very close look at the engines. My suspicions are that they are going to be very similar which would reinforce the general consensus that Subaru underrated the F-XT's HP and torque figures.

    -Frank
  • once_for_allonce_for_all Member Posts: 1,640
    me too. OB XT compared to old OB has more ground clearance. Compared to FXT it has a superior auto tranny and 'much' better mpg. The two are now, IMO, cross-shopping material.

    John
  • subearusubearu Member Posts: 3,613
    I don't consider them cross-shopping items. The F-XT to me is a 'budget' buy compared to the Legacy GT or Outback XT.

    No GT's or O-XT's here yet to test. Just a few 2.5i's at the local dealer.

    -Brian
  • pon1pon1 Member Posts: 196
    x-shopping?

    Depends where you live and whether you are price limited.

    The base GT wagon and base FXT are only about cnd$1000-1500 apart in Canada (FXT a little cheaper based on 04 prices, no 05 FXT prices yet). So unless you want/need the ground clearance, the GT and the FXT are close enough to cross shop in price terms. In fact the GT sedan and the 05 FXT may turn out to be the same price. The OB XT on the other hand is 6-7000 more as only avail in LTD trim.

    One of the things that impresses me about potential FXT ownership is that almost all owner reviewers seem highly satisfied. Seems even now after a year on the market for most owners the FXT's affordability, giant killing abilities, versatility and general fun factor hugely outweigh its shortcomings (mpg, arguably the short gearing, climate control, handling without sway bar and tire swap, etc).

    JP
  • volkovvolkov Member Posts: 1,306
    And don't forget the child seat issues. At least at a stretch you can securely squeeze 3 seats into the rear of the FXT. It is impossible to securely fasten 3 seats in the 04 OB. There must be other people out there with 3 kids under 8 years old. Maybe we don't hear from them because they bought elsewhere. Anyone notice if the seatbelt spacing issue was fixed in the 05's?
  • corkfishcorkfish Member Posts: 537
    270 horsepower and all you need is 93 octane. Take a look at the results with a cat back exhaust. 310 pound feet of torque.

    http://www.cobbtuning.com/forester/accessport/
  • rckyvntrrckyvntr Member Posts: 17
    Cross shopping? My wife sees a huge difference. She wanted to move "away" from a station wagon -- which she owned prior to her new F-XT. The OB still looks and "feels" like the mom's car from the 70s. The F-XT gave her a chance to break away (at least psychologically) from that image.
  • beanboybeanboy Member Posts: 442
    Legacy GT wagon or Forester XT will be for me. Question of engine feel, want plenty of low-end grunt. Looks liek the XT might win in that side, like the open feel of the Forester cabin to boot.

    GT has the refinement down, and well as handling. GOing to have to test drive both of them for a while on the same day to really see what I prefer.

    -B
  • once_for_allonce_for_all Member Posts: 1,640
    I like the GT best on the road, and the Forester for the dirt roads/fields. Since I need the later, it would be a tough choice.

    Maybe the Outback XT is in between the two (but the $4K more is in issue there).

    John
  • once_for_allonce_for_all Member Posts: 1,640
    Elissa, the '05 XS/XT has a "7 speed fan" which is different than our units. My guess is that a HAL fix has been put into place.

    In other news, the XS gets 30 mpg MT, dual stage air bags, the "7 speed fan" climate control,an aluminum hood, power driver's seat, ETC, and it looks like a few pounds shaved off (not sure about the later, I can't remember the 2004 specs.).

    John
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Factory tint would be nice, but only Baja has it, even the new Outback didn't get it yet, even though they promised that.

    I'd cross shop them, but a Legacy GT Limited wagon would break $30k, while the F-XT MT premium might be had for $25k. I don't think I'd stretch quite that far...

    -juice
  • zmanzman Member Posts: 200
    '05 XT gained one mpg highway--might not be enough to convince the wife, but it does come with the PP in the MT (a plus).

    Zman
  • goneskiiangoneskiian Member Posts: 381
    Very cool!

    Can't wait to see what they can do for the GT!

    I've been away from this forum for quite a while. I've got hundreds of posts to catch up on.

    Anyway, just thought I'd pop in to say hello and that I'm thoroughly enjoying my GT Ltd. Wagon!

    Cheers!
    -Ian
  • edunnettedunnett Member Posts: 553
    7 speed fan - you had to go rub that in, didn't you? ;-) since discovering that if I turn the blower dial after turning on in auto mode, that it lets me control the blower from then on... (well, barring that I don't turn the CC off then on again) I think we may be calling a truce. *sigh*
  • edunnettedunnett Member Posts: 553
    I know that no one will believe me, but in the interest of knowledge sharing, I have to document a recent 30.1 MPG tank.

    On a recent trip to Tahoe, I got 20.7 MPG mostly highway, some dirt road, some city driving on the way to and through Tahoe.

    On the return highway trip home, I filled up with Chevron 91 octane just before hopping on the highway, left the A/C off as much as I could stand it, had the roof racks removed, had a dog, camping equipment and husband loaded into car, tires all filled to 32psi, drove with cruise control... I filled up when I got home and clocked a 30.1 MPG fillup!

    Thinking it was a fluke I recalculated several times and expected the next fillup to something like 16 MPG owing to an under-fill the time before. No such fortune. The next fillup with my usual driving style clocked in at 20.4 MPG.

    Each of these three fill-ups was with 7.5 - 8.2 gallons of gas so are therefore comparable.
  • samiam_68samiam_68 Member Posts: 775
    You have the HIGHEST XT MPG EVER! Was the drive back mostly downhill as opposed to the drive there?
  • miamixtmiamixt Member Posts: 600
    I am pretty sure it was the Bait & Switch at the Dealership, and your Forester might not be the Turbo XT Model? And why 32 PSI when Subaru calls for 29/28?

    Also have you purchased any Shell Gasoline. On the East Cost Millions of Motorists might have to get their Fuel Gages replaced, as the Gas had too much Sulphur in it, ruining the Gage. I suspect you might of found some West Coast tainted Fuel that has caused these MPG readings?
  • kenskens Member Posts: 5,869
    The FXT has plenty of low end grunt, no doubt, thanks to the uber-low gearing. It's crazy quick off the line. The Legacy GT is also very quick, but it does it in a more refined sort of way. At highway speeds, though, the Legacy GT is going to rev a lot lower and ride a lot smoother.

    Ken
  • corkfishcorkfish Member Posts: 537
    Unfortunately, I've heard some bad things about the XT and Cobb's access tuner. I'm going to stay away from it until they get it straightened out.
  • bsumpterbsumpter Member Posts: 35
    I run 36/35 as opposed to the factory tire pressure settings because it wallows around like a pig with anything lower - the ride is still fine to me.

    The OEM tires have very soft sidewalls, I'm looking forward to replacing them in probably 10,000 or so more miles (I'm at 26,000 now) with something more appropriate for the XT - Falken ZX-512 or perhaps ContiExtremeContacts, in 225/60/16's. The slightly taller tire will look a bit better to me & also take care of most of the factory speedometer error, which reads about 4% high now.
  • miamixtmiamixt Member Posts: 600
    I am not a Tire Pressure expert by any means, however I just experienced 100% loss of Control in my XT for the first & hopefully LAST time, making a left turn with a little too much "thrust". I had just checked my Tire pressure, and put in 31 PSI. I am aware the Forester calls for 29 Front /28 Rear Cold PSI. The 31 heated up to 34 PSI, and while I never have been a fan of these OEM Yokohama Tires, it might be best to follow the Manufactures advice on this one, just a thought?
  • bsumpterbsumpter Member Posts: 35
    As long as you're not exceeding the max pressure allowed by the tire manufactor, you're not hurting anything - higher pressures are generally better for the tire actually (Less heat buildup among other things). Higher pressures than stock will also give you much improved lateral grip & feel on the Geolanders - if you don't believe me, try some spirited cornering both ways!

    Straight line traction will be a bit better at lower pressures, but that's not an issue for us - the Subaru's are the only cars I've ever seen that usually have guys raising the tire pressure to get *less* traction at the dragstrip. Less chance of blowing up the drivetrain or bogging off the line...
  • subewannabesubewannabe Member Posts: 403
    I was very much cross-shopping the FXT , the OBXT and the LGT wagon. The lack of foot room in the rear of the OB and LGT made it a lot easier to look harder at the FXT, and the financing incentives made it a lot easier to buy one. We will be looking to get another car in the spring , and we were thinking it would be a Highlander. Now, I can't get my wife out of the FXT....she's starting to say I need to go back and get an LGT in the spring ! The FXT is great fun to drive, especially in the mountains. The OBXT and LGT are more refined and should get better milage, esp. on the highway. We'll see.

         The owners manual specifies higher tire pressures when towing or loaded. I recently ran them up to 41 psi when travelling with 4 people, a full cargo compartment and 4 bikes on the rear hitch rack. It takes a moment to adjust to the different feel to the handling, but I am confident there is a significant safety enhancement with the greater pressure.

         Given the limited towing capacity, the FXT would benefit from a longer gearing spread. The STi has two overdrive gears in its 6 speed... obviously, there is a way to compromise between low-end accelleration and top end efficiency. I approached redline in my FXT this weekend in 2nd and the kids went wild...the acceleration just kept building! It would be nice to "sneak" along at 80, too. The higher COF will prevent the Forester from getting the same mpg as the LGT above 60mph, but a predictable 25 or 26 mpg highway would sure be nice.
    Mark
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I can't believe you broke 30, wow!

    -juice
  • corkfishcorkfish Member Posts: 537
    I keep my tires around 32 pounds all around and it seems to work. I haven't tried anything else so I can't compare. I'm also interested in switching to the Conti Extreme Contact. I don't want to have to put on snow tires however and I'm not sure how they'd do in the snow. Any one have any suggestions for a good performance tire that would be decent in the snow?
  • ezshift5ezshift5 Member Posts: 858
    ....FROM Lake Tahoe.....I once got over 20 MPG on a '69 'Vette....but - again - it was all downhill.
  • beanboybeanboy Member Posts: 442
    Yeah, the refinement is nice on the GT, but that insane low-end grunt of the FXT is mighty attractive as well, as is the lower price. Like the wide-open feeling of the Foresters as well.

    The gunslit approach that many Audis and especially the 300C/Magnum is awful. The tank-like feeling that some like makes me feel claustrophobic.

    Rear seat room really isn't an issue, but it might be by the time I get read of whatever Soobie I get. Whoa, now that's a odd thought, tehe.

    -B
  • p0926p0926 Member Posts: 4,423
    Elissa- 30 mpg is impressive even if it was all downhill!

    7.5 - 8.2 gallons per fillup? You must fill up as soon as the needle hits the 1/2 tank mark. For comparison purposes, my average is over 12 gals and I've put in 13.9 before.

    Re: tire pressure. The first thing I did when I got my Forester was air up the tires to 34 psi because I couldn't stand the wallowly feeling of the manufacturer's recommended setting. My general rule of thumb is to inflate to halfway between the manufacturer's recommended setting and the max listed on the sidewall. This seems to offer the best compromise in ride quality and also optimizes tread wear, allowing me to get over 50k miles out of the OEM Yokos on my 01 Forester.

    -Frank
  • edunnettedunnett Member Posts: 553
    I am pretty sure it was the Bait & Switch at the Dealership, and your Forester might not be the Turbo XT Model?

    He he he he .... I'm PRETTY sure I've got the turbo... hm... funny intercooler thingy under the hood blocking my access to the spark plugs, strange hissing noise on acceleration, and whip-lash like experiences passing on the highways. Pretty sure, ya. :-)

    32 psi - just for the hell of it, I try to be around 30 just 'cuz it's a round number and provides decent ride, handling and mileage.

    hm... Shell, usually I do Chevron when possible, but usually something cheap like Arco or Olympic. All west-coast funky blends. You are correct; we do not have the sulfur stink issue here that y'all on the east coast do. However, that 30 MPG was definitely a one-time occurance coming down the mountains from Tahoe (with some up hill in there too). Usually my fillups yeild 20 - 21 MPG. *shrug* It leaves me hope anyway....
    :-)
  • contaxscontaxs Member Posts: 2
    I just pulled up to a stoplight today, checking the rearview mirror as I always do. Saw nothing and returned eyes to the front when BAM, a truck crashed into me and the BMW X-5 sitting next to me. Came out of nowhere and claimed he couldn't stop on the rainy pavement. My silver beauty is at the body shop. Any of you forum folk have a similar misfortune? I'm worried that the frame got bent or some awful thing that will cause it to never be right again. Thanks for any comments.
    Jeff P
    Weston, CT
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    IC shouldn't be blocking the plugs IIRC I've changed em w/o taking off the IC.

    -mike
  • p0926p0926 Member Posts: 4,423
    Jeff- Two weeks old? Oh what rotten luck! The good news is that there's a lot less stuff to get damaged in the rear so if the frame isn't overly bent (some frame damage can be safely repaired) you should be okay. Hopefully you have a good body shop as they are definitely not all equally competent. You can also be thankful that the Forester has the best safety ratings in its class so the damage could have been much worse to both you and your ride.

    Keep us posted on how the repairs ago.

    -Frank
  • ballisticballistic Member Posts: 1,687
    Greetings. Returned from Sweden so far behind at work and in every other aspect of life that I won't even try to catch up on the message forums here or elsewhere. Just not enough time anymore, so be advised that it's highly unlikely that I will ever see any public replies to this note. If anyone desperately needs to send me a comment, Juice and/or the hosts have my e-mail address.

    My 5-speed XT's first birthday was yesterday, June 21. Total miles through the first year: 8066 - my daily commute is only about 24 miles round-trip, and I work so many hours there isn't much time to drive anywhere else! Total fuel consumed: 30 tankfuls, 374.3 gallons, for an overall MPG of 21.55. Downright mediocre compared to the claimed exploits of nameless others, especially given my 70-80% mostly-solo freeway driving at a moderate 65-70mph.

    The first 10 tankfuls covering 2601 miles (mostly on my exceedingly conservative 2,000-mile break-in regimen) used 120.4 gallons, for 21.6 MPG. The second 10 tankfuls: 2866 miles on 136.55 gallons, resulting in disappointingly LESS MPG than before: 20.99.

    The final 10 tankfuls covered 2,599 miles on 117.4 gallons, for a slightly better 22.14 MPG. Maybe this means the slightly looser engine will stay above 22 from now on, or maybe it merely means that Oregon fuel is better in spring and summer than fall and winter. BTW, the last 10 tanks were mostly 89-octane, which is probably what I'll typically buy from now on. $2.40 per gallon stinks. This car could definitely use a larger, longer-range fuel tank.

    Predictably, I still HATE the ridiculously short gearing; a day doesn't go by that I don't unconsciously reach for the shifter thinking I can't possibly be in top gear.

    Still stuck with the severe right-dashtop rattle and the faint thump-thump-thump from the steering rack when turning the steering wheel in quiet environments. The A/C is barely able to cope with high-80-degree weather and is clearly inadequate in 90+; that flat-black dashtop is a gigantic radiating heatsink. I often have to run the fan at high speed despite the noise. I sometimes think the HVAC system is actually adding unwanted heat to the airflow even when the temp dial is at its lowest setting.

    I love the excellent headlamps with my Philips VisionPlus bulbs. Great night illumination. I hate trying to read the white-on-black instruments on sunny days while wearing sunglasses - nearly impossible. Contrary opinions notwithstanding, I still think the dumbass 'way-down-there master switch for the cruise control, that has to be turned on again at every startup, is stupid and utterly unnecessary - more on this below.

    I still think the XT's brilliant combination of ride quality and nimble handling ranks up there with the best. I don't feel the need to spend a single nickle to "improve" the suspension. I still think the steering is unnecessarily overboosted, though I'm used to it. I wish the brake feel was firmer (less mushy) and wish the brakes engaged before the pedal has to travel so far down. The hill-holder that I disliked so much eventually loosened up quite a bit with added mileage. It has become fairly unobtrusive.

    I still think Subaru's decision to sell into their largest, most profitable market without allowing the choice of 5-speed MT together with sunroof and/or leather is/was absolutely brain-dead. Idiotic. Moronic. Especially when Canucks get 'em that way. Inexcusable.

    Amazingly, I haven't yet had to replace the wipers, despite a year of Oregon's famous frequent rain. The rear's getting marginal, though. And despite taking a number of what sounded like MAJOR rock hits, I can't find a single chip in the paint or in the windshield after an entire year! No door dings yet, either.

    My insurance went down slightly, and now costs $434.61 for 6 months. I guess I can quit holding my breath waiting for State Farm to jack up the rates reflecting the supercar performance.

    After about 10 months of having seen not ONE SINGLE other XT anywhere on Oregon's roads, I've finally spotted a few during the past 2 months. Even saw two in one day, one of which was an identical twin to my silver one - right down to the absence of roof crossbars. Waved at the guy, but he wasn't paying attention.

    Haven't actually driven a new Legacy yet, but I did do a walk-around sit-in. After carefully adjusting the front seat for my size, I was amazed and disappointed to find NO more rear legroom than in the XT! If anything, less! What on earth did they do with the extra 6" wheelbase??? Nevertheless, I do plan to drive one soon, although I'm making zero headway trying to convince my wife that our '97 Concorde is due for replacement. She would miss its huge, roomy back seat.

    While on vacation, I drove a rented Volvo S40 wagon from the southernmost tip of Sweden all the way north to the Arctic circle and all the way back - about 1,300 miles in all. Its turbo 2-liter was amazingly powerful and responsive - not as eyeball-flattening as the XT, but far more than ample. We never averaged less than 30 MPG on a tankful, yet had 3 adults and all our European luggage plus purchases - plus a wheelchair! - inside with no complaints from anyone! The remarkable power plus the excellent economy plus the utility left me with a healthy newfound respect for Volvos. The Volvo engine and driveline were very noticeably quieter and smoother, too. And unlike the XT's retarded cruise control setup, the Volvo's cruise control works exactly the way it should: The master switch is right on the stalk, and it DOES NOT have to be turned back on again every time the engine is started. However, its front seats can't match the XT's for long-distance comfort.

    Finally - the nifty CG-Lock seatbelt gizmo that keeps the lap portion as tight as I want across the hips is invaluable. I forgot to take it to Europe and really missed it. I will never, ever own another car without this useful accessory. Best 40 bucks this skinflint ever spent.

    Over and out.

    jb
  • miamixtmiamixt Member Posts: 600
    Post on Edmunds! Before you test drive any new Subaru, wait for their $25 Test Drive offer, got mine today and tossed it. I plan on holding on to the XT for 6 Years, or 60K. Happy Birthday to your XT, mine is 10 Months old with less than 8K on it. Your MPG Mathematics were amazing! That Noise from the Steering Column is annoying, I have noticed it from Day 1, plan to mention this to my Mechanic at the 1 Year Service/Safety Inspection. I have yet to see another Subaru in this Metro Area of 4 Million, I have seen more Scion's in Miami. Lost control of the XT yesterday, posted the experience, almost broke my Neck. Me and my XT are OK. Write us more often!
  • p0926p0926 Member Posts: 4,423
    Nice to see that Jack is as curmudgeonly as ever! I especially loved the "claimed exploits" remark. Good thing he didn't see Elissa's 30 mpg post or he would have had an epileptic seizure :-) One thing is for sure and that is he could really benefit from getting his windows tinted. My Forester's AC doesn't have the slightest problem coping with the south's 90 degree days. In fact, once I get going, I almost always keep it on the lowest fan speed.

    -Frank
  • bsumpterbsumpter Member Posts: 35
    Given your mix of driving, you're really not seeing much different mileage than I am - my normal commute averages 23 mpg with around 26,000 miles on the XT (up from 22 mpg, it started climbing at around the 15k point which is also when I switched to synthetic oil)& it's also 70-80% highway. I'll admit my speeds are rather higher though...

    The only time I see 25-27 mpg are absolutely 100% highway, but it's very consistent.
  • beanboybeanboy Member Posts: 442
    Guys, I'm looking for a couple of the Forester XT ads that ran in the Wall Street Journal in late fall/winter of 2003. One about faster than Boxster, another about beating a 350Z with family and a dog. Anybody remember them?

    -B
  • bluesubiebluesubie Member Posts: 3,497
    I think you might be able to find a scan over on nabisco.

    -Dennis
  • njswamplandsnjswamplands Member Posts: 1,760
    i remember the one about your 350Z just got smoked by a family of four and a dog ads.
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    JB, some of those issues you mention have been addressed (to a small degree) with the '05 model:

    • EPA gas ratings are slightly better than in '04. Not sure if they changed the gearing to achieve this, however?

    • The cruise control master switch is now incorporated into the CC stalk. You still have to turn it on when you start the car, but at least you don't have to hunt for the switch.

    • Moonroof (Premium Package) is now available with the 5-speed manual.

    So slowly, they are making upgrades. In hindsight, maybe you should have waited for an '05 model, but there's no sense in second-guessing yourself. BTW, I disagree with you about the rear legroom in the new Legacy. I've sat in several, and it's noticeably roomier than my Forester. It DOES lack in tow room under the front seat however, which is inexcusable.

    Bob
  • njswamplandsnjswamplands Member Posts: 1,760
  • njswamplandsnjswamplands Member Posts: 1,760
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.