>>Are never a selling point nor should they be as OEM Fog lights are useless!<<
Try them on a dark country road some night and see how much further to the left and right you can see, as in critters deciding it is a good time to jump in front of you... And I would rather have a deer or other varmint in the headlights to one side of me than in front...
Not a total solution, but it helps... and they do help in fog... And I didn't like the new small ones (looks) on the 06's forward, but they are better than the older ones...
My point was that OEM fogs compared to REAL fogs are pretty much useless, so it shouldn't be a deciding factor in buying a car. For $200 or less you can get a set of REAL GOOD fogs on your car and you'll realize that OEM fogs are really not a priority.
On my vehicles (which I drive up in the Mts upstate NY with lots of critters) I always install good driving lights appropriate for each vehcile.
I often think of those two lights under the headlights as "ditch lights" instead of fog lights, since they don't add much, but they do help a little and as you know, the ones that really do punch through the fog are probably not street-legal (even though a police officer would probably never ticket someone if that was the sole reason for a stop unless the lights were one step short of an arc-welder in intensity). I was so happy to see that Subaru finally put VDC in a Forester and then so frustrated to see what they cut in order to keep that price in some range. I would rather pay an extra $2000 and get an XT Limited with VDC and then maybe a $500 cut for ordering heated cloth seats instead of heated leather seats. That would be my perfect car, but Subaru, for some reason, does not allow much customization of its vehicles.
I was also rather surprised at first that some features were removed and some added in a rather odd fashion. The fog lights on my old '98 are useful for lighting up the roadsides and tricky corners (they would make fair cornering lights if hooked up to the turn signals). But the low beam headlights, with the sharp upper beam cutoff, actually are pretty good in fog by themselves.
The big problem with OEM fog lights is that they do NOT have a sharp upper OR lower beam cutoff. Therefore, they annoy oncoming drivers when they are used in anything other than fog conditions. Unfortunately, very many owners of vehicles with fogs leave them on all of the time. The result is that the upper cone of light is directly in the path of oncoming traffic and the lower portion reflects off rain or snow covered road surfaces and also tends to blind the oncoming driver.
I came to buy a Subaru Forester after owning 4 Saabs. The GMization of Saab resulted in some illogical decisions and a loss of quality and so I was pushed to find something better.
The reason I bought Saabs in the first place was that they were very practical and sturdy vehicles that were well suited to my driving environment. They were not sporty (except for the SPG) and had somewhat less than average power. But the total package was great including seat heaters, high quality cloth upholstery and a total package that made sense. My original Forester was the same (with the addition of the then optional Winter Driving Package).
Unfortunately, marketers tend to dream of upscale buyers whose purchasing decisions are relatively recession-proof and so they package the product to appeal to that segment. That is what happened to Saab and that seems to be what is happening to Subaru. So, when you price the package that makes the most sense as a premium item, you have to remove some of the sensible things in order for those buying at the high end to avoid feeling that they are paying too much for their package. Thus, those of us who do not want certain high end features end up having to sacrifice some of the practical items as well to get a lower price.
For me, when looking at a new vehicle, generally I look for features that I can't easily add/replace with aftermarket items as "must haves".
For instance on my Armada, I bought the LE model but without the moonroof and navigation. Those 2 options saved me close to 6000 off the sticker price. I felt that if I really wanted a roof, I could add one in the aftermarket for around $1000-1500 later on. As for the navigation, I added my carputer for around $1000, and could have added an in-dash until from crutchfield for around $1000-1500 if I really wanted to.
The reasons for going for the LE over the SE for me were the puddle lights (not easily added aftermarket), interior lights, towing package (impossible to add aftermarket), and leather (not cheaply added aftermarket) with only a slight increase in price of the LE over the SE model.
The same would go for me on the Forester in terms of the VDC, that is not something you can add later on in any size/shape or form, so I see that as a good thing. Things like leather/heated seats, moonroofs, and especially fog/driving lights can always be upgraded later on in my opinion.
anything you can do in a forester, you can do in an sTi better. Think about it. No matter what you will have aero against you. You will have weight up high against you.
One thing much better done in a Forester XT than in a WRX STi: avoiding law enforcement attention. The taller vehicle has a lower profile, so to speak. (Aside: not long ago I was following an STi down an interstate and noticed the STi's rear wing vibrating up and down at speed. It made me question its value; perhaps it needed to be made of carbon fiber? )
On topic: There's not much I can add to the discussion as to what the Forester needs that hasn't been already written. An additional gear or two in the AT, along with the Sportshift manual shift option, are something I've clamored for for years. I also wanted to see VTD/VDC, if only to get the AT Foresters into more of a RWD bias. From what I've read thus far, not everyone is sold on those features in the '07 models, so maybe I should go drive one myself to be sure.
I'm more on board as to what I don't want to see in the next Forester. Please don't make it much larger, in the RAV-4/Outlander vein; there's no need to stuff a third row of seats in it - that's what the Tribeca was for, after all! CR-V sized is fine so long as it retains its current handling characteristics. (I'm concerned that between the Tribeca and the next Impreza hatches, there may not be a need for the Forester in the model lineup; but why would Subaru kill the model with the highest rate of repeat ownership?)
Please also do not succumb to the current styling trend of sweeping the rear sheetmetal upwards and widening the C- and D-pillars such that rear visibility is reduced. Very few cars offer the excellent all-round (especially to the rear) outward visibility of the Forester. Several people who have ridden in my car have remarked on that to me, including some who I don't consider "car people" who pick up on details like that. I'd hate to see that disappear in the name of style.
I agree, you'll avoid the cops more in a Forester than an STi, but how fast are you guys going on the highway? I mean I cruise at 75-80 all day long and put on 20-30k miles a year and rarely get pulled over driving the Armada or the Legacy. We'll see when I get the GTO how that works out though....
While I love the forester it is just too small to really compete in the American market... Sure older folks and women love the car.... but the forester was finally dethroned by honda, and toyota as their own small SUVs have become larger; even coming with a 3rd row of seats...
Americans are big people and to really catch the demographic of folks who want a reliable, environment ally friendly, and capable SUV you need a vehicle that is pushing the midsize ranger.
Even if the forester grew to the size of lets say... a nissan murano or the new Santa fe
subaru is the only car company I know who makes their cars on the same small platforms... Toyota has the rav 4, the highlander and so forth, but subaru builds the forester on another small platform.
The forester is due to be redesigned in 2008. There are whispers of it being enlarged.... However I am skeptical subaru is committed to truely updating this vehicle. However if they want to stay competitive with toyota and honda (and even the new santa fe and outlander are larger and getting good reviews) they are going to have to do a serious redesign.
I can tell you that Subaru will lose a customer if they make it as big and cumbersome as these "small" SUV's like the Santa Fe and Rav4. Next step is that they'll put the H6 n and take away the turbo and five speed. I like my forester nice and nimble. Not big and ponderous.
I'm not talking about supersizing the forester.. But they could make some modest changes to enlarge it slightly.
Subaru already has the ugly tribeca... so it should not go that large... I hear they are already scrapping the tribeca front end design... now if they would make one that took regular gas....
Also I am hearing rumors of a deisel... so a bio-deisel would be nice or a gas electric hybrid.
I'm neither old nor female and I find my Forester to be the perfect size. It's quick and nimble driving around town, easily carries enough for two to go camping or for a cross-country trip and I've fit all manner of things in and/or on top of it during forays to the local home improvement store.
In addition, most super-sized Americans who need a bigger vehicle to feel comfortable in are going to want a full-size SUV.
They could keep it the same size but stretch the wheelbase a couple of inches and give it more rear leg room.
Or replace the rear strut suspension so it eats less into cargo room.
They could make some packaging improvements and give up very little, basically.
I've even thought of selling two wheelbases sizes, just like Toyota does for the RAV4. They only sell the long one here, and the short one in europe. But I'd like to see Subaru market *both* lengths here.
I just priced the "Sports" models at VanBortel (Largest dealer in US). The discount on the X is about $1000. On the XT it is about $600. The discount on the XT limited is around $1500. This makes the retail difference between the XT Sports and Limited less than $700. The Sports model has different features that appeal to a different sort of buyer, but on price, it is not different enough to matter.
My wife has an 03 Forester and she loves it. More than anything else, she'd like Subaru to add controls for the stereo on the steering wheel, like my Accord has.
You have to wonder. The legacy series (the low end - not the Outback) has many upscale standard features that the more expensive Forester lacks. I have been involved in several businesses, but I will never understand automobile marketing.
Well, '05 was Subaru's big upscale push, we kept hearing the word premium thrown around. That strategy failed - they increased costs but not sales or profits. So we can't be sure the 08 Impreza or 09 Forester will follow suit.
I say keep those models back-to-basics, just a tad roomier.
I have a 05 XT, keep getting the "Trade yours in now" adds from Subaru. Keeping this one until the Sportshift auto comes out. Need just a tad more leg room for the rear seats also.
They should be able to add tint to the next generation (MY09). When the 98 and the 03 came out, it was still registered as a car so they couldn't do it.
Since then, the Baja and Tribeca have tint. I bet they do this.
If you have driven one of the new RAVs or CRVs, you'd find out that the biggest difference is the second row space. I don't know how they did it, because they look pretty similar to my OB but they are bigger on that regard. So my wish is to place a XT besides a RAV4 and hear my wife telling me there's no comfort difference. Also, of course, VDC on all Foresters. 8 years ago, when Forester won that first Small SUV Car and Driver comparo it motivated me to buy one. I want to feel that same "my car is better than yours" feeling again. It has keep the C&Dfirst place, but falled behind in Consumer Reports as on many other magazines.
Taller crossovers and SUVs usually raise the seats, and the elevated seating does have benefits like a nice view out, more room for the feet, etc. But they're not necessarily more comfortable.
A few years ago I went to an auto show and sat in every back seat imagineable. The absolute most comfortable seat I was able to sample was the Lexus ES300. Glove soft leather, soft padding, but no more room that your 95th percentile adult would need.
More space than you need is just wasted; it doesn't necessarily make you more comfortable.
Compare that Lexus to a Chevy Malibu Maxx with the seats all the way back, and the Chevy may have acres more room but it's not nearly as comfy. Same for a Saturn Vue or a Chevy Equinox. The seats in those are just awful, despite abundant leg room they are just not comfortable.
My '97 Accord Wagon is due for replacement and a Forester is the likely replacement. AWD is a priority due to my xc skiing, kayaking, hunting, etc., but I want decent fuel economy. My wife has an '02 CR-V but I prefer Subie's practicality for the active individual: better AWD, double the roof rack capacity for starters. The new CR-V is quiet and refined but they went the wrong direction for me. The death knell for the CR-V is the unavailability of a manual transmission. Changes I'd like to see in the Forester include a more Honda-like clutch and shifter, adding a sixth gear for fuel economy on the highway, quieter interior, general improvement to interior sophistication. Keep the manual tranny, manueverability, Subary funkiness!
I've been keeping a running log of my wish list for changes against my '03 XS w/Prem package for quite some time.
Funny thing is, when I finished the list, I realized that it is almost feature for feature content I can get in the Tribeca, with the exception of a tight turning radius.
However, the Tribeca is just a little too big for my needs and I was greatly disappointed by the flat, unsupportive, non-actuating second row seats in a relatively larger car.
So if the next gen Forester works out to be a 3/4-sized Tribeca with good looks, I'll be a happy camper....
2009 Forester Wish List
Must have to consider upgrading: Improved interior lighting (esp. w/sunroof), Steering wheel audio controls, 5-speed auto,0-60 Wish list (not deal breaker): Tinted windows, Nav system w/rear camera, Auto *UP* & down power windows, Home Link, Trip computer and oil viscosity monitor like new CR-V, Memory seats, Lit visor mirrors, Sun visor extenders
CARRY-OVER MUST HAVES: Tight turning radius (<37 ft.), Premium audio, Pollen Filter, Cargo Net, Plastic cargo tray, Rear bumper cover, Autodimming mirror with compass, Security system upgrade
Even Jeep is going in the other direction, with the Patriot being car-based and most models not being Trail Rated. The Compass isn't Trail Rated no matter which model you choose.
There are fewer trails, and 97% of people never make is to those trails anyway.
Yes, STi... but actually I want my weather radio back... I figured out why it is gone. They had to put the MP3 in the Premium, XT packages and that changed the button on the radio to category... So, since they no longer had them on the "upgraded" audio system, they had to take them out of the basic X's so it wouldn't have something that the "better" ones did not...
Oh and for the 05er above who wanted more rear leg room... they did change the seats in 06 subtly to get your tad...
2008 Forester Wish List Navigation System and Stability control (VDC) for LL Bean Heated windshield and tilted rear mirrors when you shift to R (my 1999 Ford Mondeo had'em and was very cool)
How'd that work? I can't see them running heating elements thru the entire windshield. If for no other reason than it would be a distraction for the driver to have to look thru all those wires.
Works in the same way as conventional rear window heating elements. Only the wires are very tiny and they run vertical, not horizontal. The wires are so tiny that they do not distract you and it worked wonderful in those winter mornings instead scraping ice from the windshield.
My friend's Range Rover had this too. Super fine elements are hard to see and work well, but man oh man, would I hate to know what a replacement windscreen would cost... :sick:
SVX had something similar to this. It was a solar blocking metalic windshield. EZ Pass would not work through it at all. Nor radar detectors. Pretty much nothing electronic would go through! I think it was like $900-1000 to replace the windshield on it.
I remember that Ford had this on many models, probably back in the 90's or so (maybe they still do?). It had a copper-colored tint to it when viewed at an angle, caused by the metallic film.
I can't remember when they started that "pollen" filter thing. At first it was "only" in the versions above the X. I do know in 04 that ALL Foresters had the location to install, the only thing is that they did NOT put them in the X's, so all you have to do is buy one and install it...
I've been hearing the forester is to be "enlarged". I talked to my dealer who confirmed the forester and impreza are going to be built on the existing legacy platform... this will at least increase the over-all length and add some much needed leg room for back seat passengers... According to the specs it looks like the width will stay about the same... I think this will happen for the 2008 model year
I also hope the forester is offered in the upcoming toyota/subaru hybrid engine.... And it may be wishful thinking.... but a bio-diesel or bio-diesel hybrid would be great (don't know if anyone is doing diesel-hybrids though
Comments
Try them on a dark country road some night and see how much further to the left and right you can see, as in critters deciding it is a good time to jump in front of you... And I would rather have a deer or other varmint in the headlights to one side of me than in front...
Not a total solution, but it helps... and they do help in fog... And I didn't like the new small ones (looks) on the 06's forward, but they are better than the older ones...
On my vehicles (which I drive up in the Mts upstate NY with lots of critters) I always install good driving lights appropriate for each vehcile.
-mike
The big problem with OEM fog lights is that they do NOT have a sharp upper OR lower beam cutoff. Therefore, they annoy oncoming drivers when they are used in anything other than fog conditions. Unfortunately, very many owners of vehicles with fogs leave them on all of the time. The result is that the upper cone of light is directly in the path of oncoming traffic and the lower portion reflects off rain or snow covered road surfaces and also tends to blind the oncoming driver.
I came to buy a Subaru Forester after owning 4 Saabs. The GMization of Saab resulted in some illogical decisions and a loss of quality and so I was pushed to find something better.
The reason I bought Saabs in the first place was that they were very practical and sturdy vehicles that were well suited to my driving environment. They were not sporty (except for the SPG) and had somewhat less than average power. But the total package was great including seat heaters, high quality cloth upholstery and a total package that made sense. My original Forester was the same (with the addition of the then optional Winter Driving Package).
Unfortunately, marketers tend to dream of upscale buyers whose purchasing decisions are relatively recession-proof and so they package the product to appeal to that segment. That is what happened to Saab and that seems to be what is happening to Subaru. So, when you price the package that makes the most sense as a premium item, you have to remove some of the sensible things in order for those buying at the high end to avoid feeling that they are paying too much for their package. Thus, those of us who do not want certain high end features end up having to sacrifice some of the practical items as well to get a lower price.
For instance on my Armada, I bought the LE model but without the moonroof and navigation. Those 2 options saved me close to 6000 off the sticker price. I felt that if I really wanted a roof, I could add one in the aftermarket for around $1000-1500 later on. As for the navigation, I added my carputer for around $1000, and could have added an in-dash until from crutchfield for around $1000-1500 if I really wanted to.
The reasons for going for the LE over the SE for me were the puddle lights (not easily added aftermarket), interior lights, towing package (impossible to add aftermarket), and leather (not cheaply added aftermarket) with only a slight increase in price of the LE over the SE model.
The same would go for me on the Forester in terms of the VDC, that is not something you can add later on in any size/shape or form, so I see that as a good thing. Things like leather/heated seats, moonroofs, and especially fog/driving lights can always be upgraded later on in my opinion.
-mike
One thing much better done in a Forester XT than in a WRX STi: avoiding law enforcement attention. The taller vehicle has a lower profile, so to speak. (Aside: not long ago I was following an STi down an interstate and noticed the STi's rear wing vibrating up and down at speed. It made me question its value; perhaps it needed to be made of carbon fiber?
On topic: There's not much I can add to the discussion as to what the Forester needs that hasn't been already written. An additional gear or two in the AT, along with the Sportshift manual shift option, are something I've clamored for for years. I also wanted to see VTD/VDC, if only to get the AT Foresters into more of a RWD bias. From what I've read thus far, not everyone is sold on those features in the '07 models, so maybe I should go drive one myself to be sure.
I'm more on board as to what I don't want to see in the next Forester. Please don't make it much larger, in the RAV-4/Outlander vein; there's no need to stuff a third row of seats in it - that's what the Tribeca was for, after all! CR-V sized is fine so long as it retains its current handling characteristics. (I'm concerned that between the Tribeca and the next Impreza hatches, there may not be a need for the Forester in the model lineup; but why would Subaru kill the model with the highest rate of repeat ownership?)
Please also do not succumb to the current styling trend of sweeping the rear sheetmetal upwards and widening the C- and D-pillars such that rear visibility is reduced. Very few cars offer the excellent all-round (especially to the rear) outward visibility of the Forester. Several people who have ridden in my car have remarked on that to me, including some who I don't consider "car people" who pick up on details like that. I'd hate to see that disappear in the name of style.
Ed
The EVO is larger than the WRX, and it handles just fine—and I haven't heard anyone complain about how the 108.7" wheelbase 3-Series BMW handles.
It really comes down to suspension tuning, and how FHI/SOA want to deal with that. I say keep it sporty, as it currently is.
Bob
-mike
While I love the forester it is just too small to really compete in the American market... Sure older folks and women love the car.... but the forester was finally dethroned by honda, and toyota as their own small SUVs have become larger; even coming with a 3rd row of seats...
Americans are big people and to really catch the demographic of folks who want a reliable, environment ally friendly, and capable SUV you need a vehicle that is pushing the midsize ranger.
Even if the forester grew to the size of lets say... a nissan murano or the new Santa fe
subaru is the only car company I know who makes their cars on the same small platforms... Toyota has the rav 4, the highlander and so forth, but subaru builds the forester on another small platform.
The forester is due to be redesigned in 2008. There are whispers of it being enlarged.... However I am skeptical subaru is committed to truely updating this vehicle. However if they want to stay competitive with toyota and honda (and even the new santa fe and outlander are larger and getting good reviews) they are going to have to do a serious redesign.
Kyle
Subaru already has the ugly tribeca... so it should not go that large... I hear they are already scrapping the tribeca front end design... now if they would make one that took regular gas....
Also I am hearing rumors of a deisel... so a bio-deisel would be nice or a gas electric hybrid.
I'm neither old nor female and I find my Forester to be the perfect size. It's quick and nimble driving around town, easily carries enough for two to go camping or for a cross-country trip and I've fit all manner of things in and/or on top of it during forays to the local home improvement store.
In addition, most super-sized Americans who need a bigger vehicle to feel comfortable in are going to want a full-size SUV.
-Frank
Or replace the rear strut suspension so it eats less into cargo room.
They could make some packaging improvements and give up very little, basically.
I've even thought of selling two wheelbases sizes, just like Toyota does for the RAV4. They only sell the long one here, and the short one in europe. But I'd like to see Subaru market *both* lengths here.
-juice
Nope. Heated seats are still there. But I do wish I didn't have to add crossbars myself.
PS - It is a kick to drive!
The current tight turning radius is one reason why we now have two Foresters.
-juice
-Frank
I say keep those models back-to-basics, just a tad roomier.
-juice
1. The visors, when to the side, they are completely usless. They need to have extenders build in.
2. Privacy glass in the back windows, why a SUV does not have this I do not know.
3. Controls on the steering wheel. No big deal, since the reach to the radio is not a problem.
Like I said, these are very small issues, but I feel, if these were added, it would make a almost perfect vehicle into a perfect one.
Since then, the Baja and Tribeca have tint. I bet they do this.
-juice
Taller crossovers and SUVs usually raise the seats, and the elevated seating does have benefits like a nice view out, more room for the feet, etc. But they're not necessarily more comfortable.
A few years ago I went to an auto show and sat in every back seat imagineable. The absolute most comfortable seat I was able to sample was the Lexus ES300. Glove soft leather, soft padding, but no more room that your 95th percentile adult would need.
More space than you need is just wasted; it doesn't necessarily make you more comfortable.
Compare that Lexus to a Chevy Malibu Maxx with the seats all the way back, and the Chevy may have acres more room but it's not nearly as comfy. Same for a Saturn Vue or a Chevy Equinox. The seats in those are just awful, despite abundant leg room they are just not comfortable.
-juice
-juice
Funny thing is, when I finished the list, I realized that it is almost feature for feature content I can get in the Tribeca, with the exception of a tight turning radius.
However, the Tribeca is just a little too big for my needs and I was greatly disappointed by the flat, unsupportive, non-actuating second row seats in a relatively larger car.
So if the next gen Forester works out to be a 3/4-sized Tribeca with good looks, I'll be a happy camper....
2009 Forester Wish List
Must have to consider upgrading:
Improved interior lighting (esp. w/sunroof), Steering wheel audio controls, 5-speed auto,0-60 Wish list (not deal breaker):
Tinted windows, Nav system w/rear camera, Auto *UP* & down power windows, Home Link, Trip computer and oil viscosity monitor like new CR-V, Memory seats, Lit visor mirrors, Sun visor extenders
CARRY-OVER MUST HAVES:
Tight turning radius (<37 ft.), Premium audio, Pollen Filter, Cargo Net, Plastic cargo tray, Rear bumper cover, Autodimming mirror with compass, Security system upgrade
--Elliot
Price point is the catch, more than turning radius, for me.
-juice
-mike
Even Jeep is going in the other direction, with the Patriot being car-based and most models not being Trail Rated. The Compass isn't Trail Rated no matter which model you choose.
There are fewer trails, and 97% of people never make is to those trails anyway.
-juice
Oh and for the 05er above who wanted more rear leg room... they did change the seats in 06 subtly to get your tad...
-juice
25 NX 450h+ / 24 Sienna Plat AWD / 23 Civic Type-R / 21 Boxster GTS 4.0
Navigation System and Stability control (VDC) for LL Bean
Heated windshield and tilted rear mirrors when you shift to R (my 1999 Ford Mondeo had'em and was very cool)
-Frank
-Ivan
-Frank
25 NX 450h+ / 24 Sienna Plat AWD / 23 Civic Type-R / 21 Boxster GTS 4.0
-mike
At least in MD it's covered under comprehensive auto insurance policies.
Len
I also hope the forester is offered in the upcoming toyota/subaru hybrid engine.... And it may be wishful thinking.... but a bio-diesel or bio-diesel hybrid would be great (don't know if anyone is doing diesel-hybrids though