A drink at an average restaurant costs about five bucks. A Starbucks concoction costs about three
I can't remember the last time I drank anything but water at a restaurant. Well, maybe blackberry lemonade when they have it.
Free scheduled maintenance during the warranty period would definitely be a plus, although it probably wouldn't count for more than $500 to $1000 at most by my reckoning.
night and day experience from my 30k chrysler I owned (will never do that again).
Roughly half of all cars I've owned since '60 were Chrysler products, 1 used, the rest new. I haven't had a bad experience yet. We currently have a '91 Grand Caravan AWD and a '97 Concorde. Chrysler replaced the Caravan slushbox on their dime at 85,000 miles. The Concorde hasn't experienced a single major problem except a recent failed water pump at about 82,000 miles.
FWIW, Subaru includes free maintenance with the Outback LL Bean model. I think that's purely a bonus that comes at a certain price level, and of course the LL Bean costs more than the Forester XT.
Interestingly, Subaru may come out with an LL Bean edition of the Forester, so it's quite likely a turbo Forester will also get free scheduled maintenance. The rumors are that it'll get SportShift also, as well as even more power.
Subaru was testing the waters with the XT. It's hot, so now they probably feel more confident to offer more features at a higher price.
This discussion will only get more and more relevant.
FWIW, I understand your choice, kdshapiro, but I'd prefer if you didn't stereotype all Subaru owners together as one bunch. We're very unique (lots of Mac users vs. PC users, for instance) and your conclusion only makes me believe you know very little about us.
In our case we paid a slightly higher purchase price at our dealer to get our first 6 service visits included with our purchase. So we do care...
We also got an extended warranty, 7/100, and they always give us a loaner. In fact last time it was a Mercedes C class wagon with 4Matic. Some Subaru dealers can be very accomodating.
The only car to ever leave me stranded was a 89 plymouth. I had a very troublesome '01 Chrysler 300M that had almost every part of the front suspension replaced and was still making noise. I did own a 99 startus that was realtively trouble free when I traded it at 60k.
Wow, this thread is smoking. I am a current WRX wagon owner who is going to buy either the Legacy GT wagon or X3. I don't think the Forester is a direct comparison, as the X3 has much more head and leg room in the rear. I really like the XT, but it is not really a step-up from my WRX wagon, especially from my wife's point of view. For folks like me who want to move up to something with more back-seat leg room (i.e., kids), luxury, and refinement; but still retain high-performance driving dynamics, the GT and X3 seem to offer the best wares. What remains to be seen, for me, is whether the X3 justifies the $10-12K difference in price? Now, if the Legacy STi wagon arrives as rumored, there will be no confusion about what I'll buy.
BMW maintenance doesn't include tires - My 01 X5's had it's wiper blades replaced, cabin air filter, engine air filter, brake fluid changed and the oil changes with synthetic oil - all free. Never have needed a warranty repair of any kind.
Despite my XT pre-purchase reservations, some of which I still hold as valid, now halfway through the honeymoon/ break-in and fresh off another Day on the L.A. Freeways, I'm confident that the XT is inarguably the bang-for-the-buck most fully realized vehicle of its kind. Can you pay $10-20K over and get something better? I honestly don't even see the validity of the question. Money always buys something...
Concrete XT highlights:
Gold Standard AWD 5-Star Safety Japanese Reliability Excellent Driving Postion - Ergonomics - Comfort Near Sports Car Handling without undue harshness Outstanding 360 Degree Visibility Excellent Acceleration Excellent Fit & Finish Non-SUV Center of Gravity Hatchback/Cargo Versatility Standard Fogs, Rails and Racks
I don't think the Forester is a direct comparison, as the X3 has much more head and leg room in the rear.
How is much more defined? The Forester already has so much headroom at every seating position that I can't imagine many vehicles having much more - and if some do, why would anyone but Shaquille O'Neil or a top-hat wearer need more?
As for rear legroom, reviews I've read indicate that the X3 offers very little more, not much more, than the XT. Anybody have the actual numbers for each?
Martin: the '05 Legacy does look nice. And that model will get a lot of features missing from the Forester, like side curtain air bags. 250hp and 0-60 in 5.5 seconds.
I've sat in an X3 and didn't think it felt any roomier than the Forester. About the same, actually.
I'm not seeing anything like "much more" in the X3, I'm seeing less. New math, maybe?
XT legroom: 43.6 front, 33.7 rear, total 77.3 X3 legroom: 40.2 front, 35.8 rear, total 76.0
So, nominally, the X3 has a whopping 6% more rear legroom than the XT - not, in any event, what I would ever describe as "much more". However, closer examination shows that the XT has over 3" more front legroom than the X3, meaning that its seats can be (but don't have to be) slid farther back on their tracks. The only meaningful measurement for comparison is the combined front-rear total. This is because for any given size of front-seat occupant who adjusts the seats to give the same front legroom in both the XT and the X3, the Forester will have MORE rear-seat legroom than the larger, much heavier X3 - not less.
The Forester also offers nearly double the seats-up interior cargo space.
Can you fit a bike in a bike rack, standing up in the cargo area of the XT? If you can't go to jail, go directly to jail. Yes, it's a bargain, and that's exactly what you get. You can save over $10 grand and get something almost as good. Hyundai Santa Fe. Can you justify the extra $10 grand. That's what this conversation is about. Value. Period.
I would rather spend $40K and be happy, be than $25K and be okay.
As Juice indicated, your wish (carrying bikes bolt-upright inside) is the XT's command. However, I have no idea why that would be of utmost importance to anyone anyhow. You're certainly not going to carry bikes inside, upright, in an X3 and also carry any back-seat passengers. There are hitch-mount and/or top-mount bike racks specifically for that purpose. l
You're beginning to strike me as someone who is becoming desperate to find a reason, any reason, no matter how obscure, to somehow justify paying half again more for a vehicle that on any objective basis is not worth that much more.
kdshapiro, keep your 3-series and get a Subaru, similar to what I did. These things are all about utility and bang for the buck anyway, not performance. In any event, you're fighting a losing battle with these guys.
kdshapiro, keep your 3-series and get a Subaru, similar to what I did. These things are all about utility and bang for the buck anyway, not performance.
Not sure how to read that, but are you suggesting that the Forester XT buyer won't get performance? On a 0-60 or 0-quartermile basis, it's the fastest AWD SUV money can buy, with the sole exception of the $90,000 Cayenne Turbo.
That could be Subaru's slogan: Performance without the pricetag.
I would rather spend $40K and be happy, be than $25K and be okay.
I'd rather spend $25K for a car that will do nearly anything an X3 will do (well, except for wowing the valet-parking attendants at the country club), will do a number of important things demonstrably better, and will leave me with $15,000 for other high-value uses - charity, grandkids' education, civic projects - anything but stroking my need for self-indulgence.
For those who aren't familiar is a secret employee of BMW. He has been sent here to educate us uninformed drivers of the ways of the propellor. For each new convert he gets $100 (LOL all the above is J/K). I say this and I am the one with Quotes on Infiniti's site lol.
In one of the road tests of the X-3 (I believe it was Car & Driver) one of the editors stated that if he were a buying a vehicle in this segment he would buy the Forester XT instead of the BMW X-3. He mentioned performance and price as part of his criteria, but also sounded as if he just liked the XT better. I have owned several BMW sedans in the past and they were very enjoyable cars to drive. If I were going to really indulge myself I would probably buy a BMW M5, but I just can't justify spending that much on a car. I love my Forester XT. I consider it a better value than the BMWs. It is very well made and is the fastest accelerating four wheeled vehicle I have ever owned. I call it my Torque Monster. Different stroke for different folks.
"Not sure how to read that, but are you suggesting that the Forester XT buyer won't get performance?"
No, that’s not what I’m saying. I’m very impressed with the XT and THINK I would choose it before the others in this thread pending test drives. But I would never spend any “performance” money on ANY vehicle with a high center of gravity, that is, higher than a sedan, wagon or sports car—such as the cars being discussed here. And that's because no matter how good they are with muscle, they are ALWAYS compromised with handling. My 02 Legacy Outback cost $23K new but it’s strictly a workhorse... commuter car, trips to Home Depot etc. It handles well, is nimble, and has a shining talent in snow, rain and on rough roads. But this is the limit I care to spend on such a car and within this budget Subaru can’t be beat. I’m a three-car owner so my criteria is a LOT different from one-car owners.
What I like about Subaru is that they cut their teeth on these types of vehicles whereas BMW is just trying to milk the cash cow. What I never liked about Subaru is that they always had horrible automatic trannys and anemic engines, but this seems to be changing and you guys are benefiting. I’m glad to see this because I know how Subaru owners love their cars, and this it what it’s all about. BMW owners also love their cars but I personally cannot see spending luxury-car money on anything but a sedan, coupe or sports car. This is why I suggested that kdshapiro stay with the apple but ALSO get the orange if possible.
The XT unquestionably has a higher C/G than (say) the WRX sedan or wagon; on the same chassis, the Forester is raised an inch or so for more clearance, and its body is another 2 or 3 inches taller. However, despite that, its C/G may not be appreciably higher than non-Subaru 'normal' sedans. One, the center of mass of the engine (a significant part of total weight) is lower than inline 4s or V-6s. And two, the 2nd-generation Forester uses quite a bit of aluminum high up - in the roof, tailgate, and hood, for instance. These factors together produce a lower C/G than the Forester's overall height would suggest.
People who drive really hard will probably want to invest in better tires, wider wheels, and stiffer sway bars on an XT. For my driving style, I couldn't possibly ask for a better all-round blend of great cornering, crisp steering, good transitions, and a compliant ride that never punishes. As close to perfection as one can get these days, IMO.
I got all those features in a FX35 with Tech package (03)for 40638 on a sticker of 44375. I built a loaded Forester XT at carsdirect.com and got a MSRP or 29k and a purchase price of 26k
clpurnell- Correct me if I'm wrong but some of the options you listed require the following:
a. Touring Package (leather, power seats with memory, power tilt and telescopic steering wheel, 300-watt Bose audio system)
b. Sports Package (20" wheels, aluminum pedals)
c. DVD mobile entertainment system.
Once you include these the price jumps by $6,000 increasing the price differential to approx $20,000.
The last of the automatics you're referring to was made in 1997, in the SVX. Since then they've actually been very robust, FWIW.
Subaru does very well in long-term reliability surveys, this is an advantage of theirs, not a disadvantage. IMO they are about equal to Infiniti, with both well ahead of BMW.
Subie owners love their cars, as do BMW owners lover their cars. Both brands have cult-like followings, probably more so than any other current brands save a few exotics, or near-exotics.
That being said, isn't it safe to assume that both brands make great cars, share many similar attributes, even though they may be aimed at different audiences?
If you love cars, love driving, and are a BMW owner; I think would would be very happy behind the wheel on an XT. By the same token, if you're an XT owner, I would think you would very much enjoy the experience behind the wheel of a BMW.
If you could throw away the $$ issue here, I think most people here would get along just fine, as we're all singing in the same choir. .
Beemers, two-wheel BMWs that is, use boxer engines, even. The brochure totes the boxer layout quite extensively, actually.
Look at what else they have in common: rear drive shaft on every model. Longitudinal engine layouts. Good front to rear weight balance. Cult-like following. Appeal to enthusiasts in each segment.
"Subie owners love their cars, as do BMW owners love their cars. Both brands have cult-like followings, probably more so than any other current brands save a few exotics, or near-exotics."
Yep, just throw Porsche in there and you have perhaps the three biggest groups of nut jobs known to mankind.
The XT ain't perfect. Notwithstanding that other owners assert that its interior noise levels are no higher than (say) RAV-4 or CR-V or even Lexus 330FX (which is really hard to believe), the XT is definitely noisier inside than I'd prefer. Not having been in an X3, my time inside a 325ix and several Audi A4 Avants persuades me that both are very noticeably quieter inside. That, plus the BMW's turbine-like lack of vibration, are two lux-car attribute that would be worth something to me. I'm also not quite as thrilled with the XT's interior appointments as others; the cloth doesn't have a nice 'touch', the leather and sunroof can't be bought with 5-speed, and there is only one available color, which is actually an odd mix of blacks and grays. The white-on-black instruments are hard to read in sunlight, the automatic climate control (another stupid, unnecessary techie item for techie sake) is erratic, there's no govebox light, and the range of the keyless remote is far too short under most conditions.
That said, most of these issues could be corrected without raising the price of the car much if at all. So, an XT that fixed them all would still sell at a $10K to $15K advantage over the FX or X3.
Then we could debate whether Porsche is a one- or 2-syllable word. It never ceases to astound me how many Porsche pilots don't know that it's the latter. Doctor Ferdinand and his father must be spinning in their graves.
is a plant from Subaru of America. Just in case any of us were suffering from any buyers remorse and wondering if we should have paid a little more money, his weak arguments in support of the X3 are just easy softballs tossed to us to make us realize how great or XTs are. Otherwise, he would try to add to the actual debate with some objective reasoning and facts.
In 2003 The Tech package included everything save roof rack and satelite raido. They broke it up this year because some wanted the tech package minus the dvd system and some wanted all the toys but wanted to stick with the 18" wheels for a softer ride.
My car in 2004 would cost 45,240 with a purchase price through carsdirect of 41.7 so about 900 increase in MSRP and 1100 more than I paid for my 03. (This is for RWD, AWD adds about 1200)
I just added a "Cult Cars" thread to the "News & View" section, inspired by this thread; and linked it to Subaru, Porsche and BMW areas here at Edmunds. Should be fun.
I drove a new WRX with auto back in the fall. Unless there was something wrong, it was the worst auto tranny I've ever driven and the worst I could ever possibly imagine. Could not get off the line. Handled great, loved the power and suspension, but found it unbuyable without stick. I'm really dying for some stick time on an STi but dealers aren't budging with test drives due to supply.
Dealers aren't willing to give test drives on the STi because:
1. The demographic interested in this car might drive them unsafely.
2. Nobody will buy a high performance vehicle like the STi with any miles on it.
designman - the auto tranny on the XT is NICE. Perfectly mated to the engine and it certainly has no problems getting off the line. I testdrove the WRX as well about 9 months ago and I would NOT get that car in an AT.
As you may have surmised from others' replies, the WRX is not at all well suited for an automatic. The XT, on the other hand, is an entirely different and wonderful beast. Although I bought the 5-speed, I test-drove the XT automatic and think it is actually the better of the two. The XT's abundant low-down torque and almost nonexistent turbo lag (both of which sharply contrast with the WRX, which is anemic anywhere below midrange) makes it a delight with the slushbox. If you haven't driven one, you're missing a sweet treat.
One point I would like to make regarding this whole comparison is I think the avg. FX buyer was not looking for an SUV at all. Most of the buyers here and on other forums went in the dealership looking at either a G35 of some sort or a M35. I myself was looking for a sports sedan. I believe the same will be true of X3 buyers. They will either be looking for a smaller X5 or a larger 3 series. My point is I NEVER considered the F-XT. Yeah I knew about it and I knew it was fast but just was not what I was looking for. I had wanted a G35 for a while then saw an FX at the auto show and was hooked.
The subie to me is for people who were looking at maybe a WRX wagon and decided to take the extra space of Forester. Not a bad thing just a different demographic is all. Also the FX owners here are pretty mild mannered and have come from a bunch of different cars (mostly audi, bmw, Lexus etc) so I doubt they seriously cross shopped the subie either and since infinti is going through a major turnaround not to many fanatics yet.
I do not doubt the power, awd ability or value of the subie but I could NEVER drive one and be even close to as happ as I am with my FX. Just not my cup of tea. Now when they come out with the legacy GT or the 7 passenger SUV I would be interested.
Way to many posts. Seems like there's quite the furor to prove the Subaru is better for $10K less. Okay I know people who have a $9.99 steak at Outback and claim it's better than a $200 dinner at the Palm or Palm II or Morts, Peter Lugers etc. Steak, service, ambience and all, Outback has them outclassed. These people just won't get it. Yes to them it is better, and it is the truth, but there is another large truth out there, that people will spend the money to eat in these high class restaurants because there is something they see in it.
Comments
I can't remember the last time I drank anything but water at a restaurant. Well, maybe blackberry lemonade when they have it.
Free scheduled maintenance during the warranty period would definitely be a plus, although it probably wouldn't count for more than $500 to $1000 at most by my reckoning.
Roughly half of all cars I've owned since '60 were Chrysler products, 1 used, the rest new. I haven't had a bad experience yet. We currently have a '91 Grand Caravan AWD and a '97 Concorde. Chrysler replaced the Caravan slushbox on their dime at 85,000 miles. The Concorde hasn't experienced a single major problem except a recent failed water pump at about 82,000 miles.
Interestingly, Subaru may come out with an LL Bean edition of the Forester, so it's quite likely a turbo Forester will also get free scheduled maintenance. The rumors are that it'll get SportShift also, as well as even more power.
Subaru was testing the waters with the XT. It's hot, so now they probably feel more confident to offer more features at a higher price.
This discussion will only get more and more relevant.
FWIW, I understand your choice, kdshapiro, but I'd prefer if you didn't stereotype all Subaru owners together as one bunch. We're very unique (lots of Mac users vs. PC users, for instance) and your conclusion only makes me believe you know very little about us.
In our case we paid a slightly higher purchase price at our dealer to get our first 6 service visits included with our purchase. So we do care...
We also got an extended warranty, 7/100, and they always give us a loaner. In fact last time it was a Mercedes C class wagon with 4Matic. Some Subaru dealers can be very accomodating.
-juice
Can you pay $10-20K over and get something better?
I honestly don't even see the validity of the question.
Money always buys something...
Concrete XT highlights:
Gold Standard AWD
5-Star Safety
Japanese Reliability
Excellent Driving Postion - Ergonomics - Comfort
Near Sports Car Handling without undue harshness
Outstanding 360 Degree Visibility
Excellent Acceleration
Excellent Fit & Finish
Non-SUV Center of Gravity
Hatchback/Cargo Versatility
Standard Fogs, Rails and Racks
Pragmatically, one can do no better...
-srp
How is much more defined? The Forester already has so much headroom at every seating position that I can't imagine many vehicles having much more - and if some do, why would anyone but Shaquille O'Neil or a top-hat wearer need more?
As for rear legroom, reviews I've read indicate that the X3 offers very little more, not much more, than the XT. Anybody have the actual numbers for each?
I've sat in an X3 and didn't think it felt any roomier than the Forester. About the same, actually.
-juice
Here are the numbers, according to specs on several auto-comparison sites:
XT headroom: 39.8 front, 39.8 rear
X3 headroom: 39.3 front, 39.4 rear
I'm not seeing anything like "much more" in the X3, I'm seeing less. New math, maybe?
XT legroom: 43.6 front, 33.7 rear, total 77.3
X3 legroom: 40.2 front, 35.8 rear, total 76.0
So, nominally, the X3 has a whopping 6% more rear legroom than the XT - not, in any event, what I would ever describe as "much more". However, closer examination shows that the XT has over 3" more front legroom than the X3, meaning that its seats can be (but don't have to be) slid farther back on their tracks. The only meaningful measurement for comparison is the combined front-rear total. This is because for any given size of front-seat occupant who adjusts the seats to give the same front legroom in both the XT and the X3, the Forester will have MORE rear-seat legroom than the larger, much heavier X3 - not less.
The Forester also offers nearly double the seats-up interior cargo space.
The X3 is looking worse and worse, folks.
I would rather spend $40K and be happy, be than $25K and be okay.
Subaru of America chose to market the roof top and hitch-mounted bike carriers. Co-marketed with Yakima, actually.
Hyundai does not sell a Performance Compact SUV. Even the 3.5l does not generate the levels of performance for this class.
The non-turbo Forester XS can outrun the old 2.7l V6 Santa Fe, so those compete directly now. The XS that is, not the XT.
-juice
You're beginning to strike me as someone who is becoming desperate to find a reason, any reason, no matter how obscure, to somehow justify paying half again more for a vehicle that on any objective basis is not worth that much more.
suggesting a $14K Hyundai is almost an XT?
can one even get a $14K Santa Fe?
qualifiers just qualify...
to most folk, standing up a bike in back is handy but hardly a deal-maker/breaker...if that is your top priority, so be it.
I would rather spend $40K and be happy
Though dubious, I would concede that if spending the extra money indeed makes one happy then one should pursue this 'happiness at a price' philosophy.
I was Happy before my XT - still am...
~s(nickering)rp
Not sure how to read that, but are you suggesting that the Forester XT buyer won't get performance? On a 0-60 or 0-quartermile basis, it's the fastest AWD SUV money can buy, with the sole exception of the $90,000 Cayenne Turbo.
That could be Subaru's slogan: Performance without the pricetag.
I'd rather spend $25K for a car that will do nearly anything an X3 will do (well, except for wowing the valet-parking attendants at the country club), will do a number of important things demonstrably better, and will leave me with $15,000 for other high-value uses - charity, grandkids' education, civic projects - anything but stroking my need for self-indulgence.
No, that’s not what I’m saying. I’m very impressed with the XT and THINK I would choose it before the others in this thread pending test drives. But I would never spend any “performance” money on ANY vehicle with a high center of gravity, that is, higher than a sedan, wagon or sports car—such as the cars being discussed here. And that's because no matter how good they are with muscle, they are ALWAYS compromised with handling. My 02 Legacy Outback cost $23K new but it’s strictly a workhorse... commuter car, trips to Home Depot etc. It handles well, is nimble, and has a shining talent in snow, rain and on rough roads. But this is the limit I care to spend on such a car and within this budget Subaru can’t be beat. I’m a three-car owner so my criteria is a LOT different from one-car owners.
What I like about Subaru is that they cut their teeth on these types of vehicles whereas BMW is just trying to milk the cash cow. What I never liked about Subaru is that they always had horrible automatic trannys and anemic engines, but this seems to be changing and you guys are benefiting. I’m glad to see this because I know how Subaru owners love their cars, and this it what it’s all about. BMW owners also love their cars but I personally cannot see spending luxury-car money on anything but a sedan, coupe or sports car. This is why I suggested that kdshapiro stay with the apple but ALSO get the orange if possible.
On the subject of getting converts... some of you other guys are doing quite a job of proselytizing.
People who drive really hard will probably want to invest in better tires, wider wheels, and stiffer sway bars on an XT. For my driving style, I couldn't possibly ask for a better all-round blend of great cornering, crisp steering, good transitions, and a compliant ride that never punishes. As close to perfection as one can get these days, IMO.
clpurnell- Correct me if I'm wrong but some of the options you listed require the following:
a. Touring Package (leather, power seats with memory, power tilt and telescopic steering wheel, 300-watt Bose audio system)
b. Sports Package (20" wheels, aluminum pedals)
c. DVD mobile entertainment system.
Once you include these the price jumps by $6,000 increasing the price differential to approx $20,000.
-Frank P.
Subaru does very well in long-term reliability surveys, this is an advantage of theirs, not a disadvantage. IMO they are about equal to Infiniti, with both well ahead of BMW.
-juice
That being said, isn't it safe to assume that both brands make great cars, share many similar attributes, even though they may be aimed at different audiences?
If you love cars, love driving, and are a BMW owner; I think would would be very happy behind the wheel on an XT. By the same token, if you're an XT owner, I would think you would very much enjoy the experience behind the wheel of a BMW.
If you could throw away the $$ issue here, I think most people here would get along just fine, as we're all singing in the same choir.
Bob
Look at what else they have in common: rear drive shaft on every model. Longitudinal engine layouts. Good front to rear weight balance. Cult-like following. Appeal to enthusiasts in each segment.
-juice
<ducking & running>
Bob
Yep, just throw Porsche in there and you have perhaps the three biggest groups of nut jobs known to mankind.
;-)
That said, most of these issues could be corrected without raising the price of the car much if at all. So, an XT that fixed them all would still sell at a $10K to $15K advantage over the FX or X3.
Then we could debate whether Porsche is a one- or 2-syllable word. It never ceases to astound me how many Porsche pilots don't know that it's the latter. Doctor Ferdinand and his father must be spinning in their graves.
Ballistic is having a moment of weakness...jump on it man!!!!!
;-)
My car in 2004 would cost 45,240 with a purchase price through carsdirect of 41.7 so about 900 increase in MSRP and 1100 more than I paid for my 03. (This is for RWD, AWD adds about 1200)
CAN'T DECIDE WHETHER TO LEASE AN X-3 OR FX35
/direct/view/.ee9202c
Bob
Instead, buy a Forester XT, run circles around those others, and laugh all the way to the bank with your 5-figure savings.
1. The demographic interested in this car might drive them unsafely.
2. Nobody will buy a high performance vehicle like the STi with any miles on it.
designman - the auto tranny on the XT is NICE. Perfectly mated to the engine and it certainly has no problems getting off the line. I testdrove the WRX as well about 9 months ago and I would NOT get that car in an AT.
overtime
Most dealers will agree, as most WRXs on lots and sold are 5-speed manuals. Very few are sold with the automatic, and for good reason.
Bob
And please fix your CAPS key :-)
Steve, Host
Nobody has admitted to being an FX cult member yet.
One point I would like to make regarding this whole comparison is I think the avg. FX buyer was not looking for an SUV at all. Most of the buyers here and on other forums went in the dealership looking at either a G35 of some sort or a M35. I myself was looking for a sports sedan. I believe the same will be true of X3 buyers. They will either be looking for a smaller X5 or a larger 3 series. My point is I NEVER considered the F-XT. Yeah I knew about it and I knew it was fast but just was not what I was looking for. I had wanted a G35 for a while then saw an FX at the auto show and was hooked.
The subie to me is for people who were looking at maybe a WRX wagon and decided to take the extra space of Forester. Not a bad thing just a different demographic is all. Also the FX owners here are pretty mild mannered and have come from a bunch of different cars (mostly audi, bmw, Lexus etc) so I doubt they seriously cross shopped the subie either and since infinti is going through a major turnaround not to many fanatics yet.
I do not doubt the power, awd ability or value of the subie but I could NEVER drive one and be even close to as happ as I am with my FX. Just not my cup of tea. Now when they come out with the legacy GT or the 7 passenger SUV I would be interested.
Fixed now, thx.
Steve, Host
Same difference here as far as I'm concerned.