Subaru Forester (up to 2005)

1…213214216218219…344

Comments

  • padraicsdadpadraicsdad Member Posts: 16
    To the men and women who sail Aegis ships, they're ALL targets. If it flies, it dies.

    CJ
  • c_hunterc_hunter Member Posts: 4,487
    Leo wasn't suggesting you rotate the spare into duty, just use it to temporarily fill the place of the first wheel you remove. It would go like this:

    1) remove Driver's side front wheel (DF) and replace with spare.

    2) remove the drivers' side rear wheel (DR) and replace it with DF.

    3) remove passenger side front (PF) and replace with DR.

    4) remove passenger side rear (PR) and replace with PF.

    5) remove spare from driver's side front and replace with PR.

    6) put spare back in trunk.

    It's just a strategy to rotate tires if you only have one jack. Of course this only applies if you want to cross tires side to side.

    Craig
  • ballisticballistic Member Posts: 1,687
    padriacsdad says, "To the men and women who sail Aegis ships, they're ALL targets. If it flies, it dies."

    Interservice rivalries are all well and good, but the USS Stark was an Ageis frigate. Those two flying objects that died only after striking were Exocet missiles...

    - jack
  • ballisticballistic Member Posts: 1,687
    Craig: "Leo wasn't suggesting you rotate the spare into duty, just use it to temporarily fill the place of the first wheel you remove."

    The fog slowly lifts, and I see - but only briefly...

    - jack
  • leo2633leo2633 Member Posts: 589
    Thanks for clearing that up!

    Len
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Actually, after giving my wife the glowing review, she was kinda smiling. I think when the premium package arrives in a 5 speed, I'll take her in and let her drive it. I love empathy!

    Love those crash test results. Summary - Forester was the only one out of the 12 tested that offered Good protection standard. Period.

    quickly get around on short straights

    Will it ever. Imagine, too, that at altitude turbos don't lose power, they just use the bleed off valve less. The XT felt like it could pass any one at any time. Surprise that wheezing 350Z on the mountain.

    -juice
  • terrahopperterrahopper Member Posts: 10
    The Forester was the ONLY small SUV out of the 12 to achieve a Good rating in both side impact and frontal offset impact tests. The Ford Escape received a Good for side impact (w/side airbags), but a Marginal for frontal offset.

    IIHS '03 Forester Frontal Offset Results:
    http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/0214.htm

    IIHS '03 Forester Side Impact Results:
    http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/side/s0312.htm

    Peace out,
    TerraHopper
  • gened1gened1 Member Posts: 256
    Now I see the light too!!
    Gene
  • raybearraybear Member Posts: 1,795
    Had a woman in the showroom this morning, she saw the report on TV and wanted to check out the Forester. Kudos to Subaru for building safe cars.
  • hypovhypov Member Posts: 3,068
    what was that line?

    "Build it, and they will come"...?

    -Dave
  • fryingbolognafryingbologna Member Posts: 85
    (this post is also in the SUV board - sorry, rookie mistake)

    OK, I know its a bit of a stretch to compare these two, but these are the two models in my price range that seem to best meet all of my requirements; resale, mileage, safety and 'niftiness'. We have a 2003 Accord that is just a sweet, sweet ride, but it was dorky enough to buy a Honda in the first place. A second one might push me over the edge, but I cannot find a better car for the money than the Accord! Opinions would be appreciated, especially in the following areas: from reading through the boards, the Forester sounds like it mostly has problems with power (non XT), mileage (XT), general manual transmission issues, and I have read a few 'cold start' issues as well. The car will be driven in near-Rocky mountain winters. Care to enlighten me?

    Question #2. The Edmunds site is great, and I find myself zipping back-and-forth from area to area. I appreciate the "True Cost To Own", and I have read how it works, BUT, can anyone explain how the 2003 Forester XS AWD 4 dr Wagon w/ Premium Package (2.5L 4cyl 4A) can have such poor numbers (actually, poor location on the slider bar is more like it) compared to the same car with the leather package? Is/was there a major rebate offered that I am not aware of?
  • raybearraybear Member Posts: 1,795
    I'd put the Forester up against a regular 4-cyl Accord any day.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Haven't seen you around for awhile. Got your name on the front page of your dealer site I see :-)

    Steve, Host
  • ninianninian Member Posts: 16
    I've owned one of each, although the Accord was a little older than yours. These are both terrific vehicles that are a pleasure to drive. Major differences, based on the models I've owned: Accord (4-cylinder) had better mileage, more sophisticated styling inside and out, smoother drivetrain, more rear seat room, and was a bit more comfortable on the road. Forester has better driving position, is easier to enter and exit, has noticeably better acceleration (manual tranny), more stable cornering, much more flexible in what you can haul inside. Forester is also a lot easier to work on yourself and has had better body integrity (loose screws, broken interior door handles, etc.) The biggest difference is rotten weather performance. I've driven the Forester in heavy rain, and the thing feels like it's on rails. In snow and slop, I've been able to handle conditions in the Forester with ease that would have been a challenge for the Accord. The driving experience with the Accord was that you felt pampered by a very sophisticated, well-engineered vehicle. The Forester is just plain fun, and its capabilities give you a strong sense of security, regardless of where you need to go and regardless of conditions. Hope this helps.
  • once_for_allonce_for_all Member Posts: 1,640
    yes! I get it now. But it sounds like a lot of work, why not just get a coupla jack stands so you don't mess with the spare?

    John
  • ballisticballistic Member Posts: 1,687
    flyingbologna wonders, "Forester sounds like it mostly has problems with power (non XT), mileage (XT), general manual transmission issues,"

    Especially if a manual transmission suits you, you owe it to yourself to take an extended test drive in a 5-speed Forester X/XS. It's an extremely pleasant, versatile vehicle with ample power for most owners and most circumstances - plus it costs less and delivers better mileage on cheaper regular gas. You may well find that it's more than sufficient.

    I'm buying an XT instead mainly because I value the relaxed, unstressed experience that comes with having more power in reserve than I'll ever likely need - meaning that everything can be accomplished with less than full throttle and less than max revs and not always having to be in the "right" gear. I'm not thrilled with its disappointing EPA ratings and costlier premium fuel requirement, but you can't have everything.

    I don't worry about the transmission because my XT will driven to the max less often than most others.

    - jack
  • raybearraybear Member Posts: 1,795
    Yeah, I was working at a Volvo store and these guys called me to make an offer. I've been back with Subies for a week. Gonna be a struggle to teach them how to deal with internet customers.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    But I'm driving a '97 Outback now myself :-)

    Oh, and make the other guys at Crabtree read Town Hall - that'll educate them fast, lol.

    Steve, Host
  • john284john284 Member Posts: 71
    It just happened I own both, I got 01 5 spd forester S new first three years ago, then bought my wife 03 accord lx auto with side airbag last fall. After putting nearly 53k on the subie, I can finally say, the subaru and honda are only the same in price range.... Subaru got me through the tough winter we had, it is not a great car overall, because it has weak points (transmission shudder, engine rough, rudimentary suspension) but one thing you will be glad to have is AWD, this thing is great for handling too, but it needs more maintenance (tires have to be well in line), I have gone through 10 tires now. If the forester XT has a better MPG, I would certainly consider one. In the meantime, I dont mind owning another honda, just not a same one, may be a Acura TSX.

    Dont buy 5 spd subaru, get an auto subaru but that auto subaru is a FWD unless slip is about to happen, so the handling may be different. Plus auto Sub is slow, so buy a XT auto turbo, then the MPG sucks and you have to put premium gas, so maybe you sould trade in your honda and get a pilot instead.
  • hypovhypov Member Posts: 3,068
    Eh...John-
    Subaru in 4EATs are All Wheel Drive, having it's torque split @ 80/20 to start and variates from there ;-)

    -Dave
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    Just took a "quick" spin in the XT automatic. So now I've driven both the 5-speed and automatic.

    Comments:

    I can see why Ken might have been less "wowed" with the automatic. It is very fast, but not terribly exciting. Don't get wrong, the turbo and automatic makes for a great combo, but if you like rowing the gears... well, it's just not as much fun.

    Still, it's far more fun than a non-turbo automatic. Bottom line: The 210 HP turbo is a winner, in either 5-speed or automatic.

    Bob
  • subearusubearu Member Posts: 3,613
    So Ken needs to go test it again! And Juice was going to test an AT as well today.

    Excitement is the WRX or perhaps the upcoming Legacy's. The XT is just simply quick. Does that sum it up properly? ;-)

    -Brian
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    the dealer had a black STi on the showroom floor, and it get better gas mileage than the XT! 18 city & 24 highway! The XT only gets 23 on the highway in both 5-speed & automatic.

    Also, the saleswoman there just bought a white STi! She has over 3000 miles on it, and on a trip to NYC recently, got ~ 28 mpg! So... I guess that means STis are now chick-cars. :)

    Bob
  • c_hunterc_hunter Member Posts: 4,487
    Juice wrote: "Actually, after giving my wife the glowing review, she was kinda smiling". Ah yes, I've seen that look from my wife too after describing an exciting car. It's the "aha, yeah, OK, right, so you must be deluded honey, but I'm smiling because it's so amusing to watch you, such a dumb gorilla of a man who wants another new car...."

    raybear: glad to see you back! I'll have to send my parents over to you when they're ready for they're next Subaru (they live in Bristol CT). How's your service department? My dad needs to get the clutch "judder" service taken care of; his 2000 Outback is finally exhibiting the symptoms after 45,000 miles of being trouble free.

    Bob: no question, an auto trans will smother any turbo engine. I would say a 5-spd is a must with a turbo.

    Craig
  • kenskens Member Posts: 5,869
    Bob,

    Now I'll sleep bettwe knowing that I wasn't too far off the mark with my impression of the XT auto. It was certainly MUCH better than when the auto is mated to a 2.5 NA engine.

    I've gotta find a dealer with a 5-speed!

    Ken
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    even ore so than the 5-speed, reminds me of a big V8 with an automatic. It gets the job done very quickly and very efficiently, just a tad on the boring side, that's all.

    Yikes! Did I just use the word "boring" to describe the XT automatic?!?! For shame...

    Bob
  • subearusubearu Member Posts: 3,613
    I'll have to test both as well then. Guess I could be fine with a MT w/ an aftermarket moonroof...but the dw 'demands' an AT.

    Guess I've got some lobbying to do then... ;-)

    -Brian
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    It's a tough job, but somebody has to it... :)

    Bob
  • fryingbolognafryingbologna Member Posts: 85
    Thanks for the great help so far!

    We have a 2003 6 cyl Accord with most of the bells and whistles. 240 hp engine, steadily improving mileage (should get to 25 mpg city eventually), takes regular gas, goes like stink, rides like butter, great resale, at least CAN $2500 cheaper than the tricked out Forester XS, very generic looks (at least everyone isn't driving one yet, unlike the CRV!). Auto transmission will be necessary for the better half.
  • forestergumpforestergump Member Posts: 119
    I have the same issue with regard to the MT vs. AT. My SO doesn't drive a MT (never did?), and if her Camry ever broke down, we'd be stuck in a difficult position. Also, living in a large metropolitan area with some serious traffic issues takes away some of the enjoyment of driving a MT. On top of that, she hinted at possibly renting or buying a folding camper for future vacations, which would likely require a real SUV with more towing capacity than the Forester. Since I no longer do any serious off-roading and have no desire for driving a gas guzzler, I'm pretty sure I can squash that one with the point that there aren't any acceptable SUVs (for me) in the same price and quality range as the Forester XT. And neither of us wants to purchase a more expensive vehicle at this time. So, an XT it will be (hopefully).
    -Bob
  • ballisticballistic Member Posts: 1,687
    forestergump wrote, "she hinted at possibly renting or buying a folding camper for future vacations, which would likely require a real SUV with more towing capacity than the Forester."

    I confess that I haven't looked at folding campers in a few years, but assuming you avoid a really large, fancy one I'd think it wouldn't be difficult to find one that would comfortably fit within the Forester's 2,000 lb (automatic) or 2,400 lb (MT) towing limits. Have they all grown heavier than that?

    - jack
  • tkevinblanctkevinblanc Member Posts: 356
    In fact, they are lighter than in years past if you don't get the ones with on-board everything. Those new chateau ones are really cool, really easy to use, and light.
  • forestergumpforestergump Member Posts: 119
    When I did a quick check the other night at the Coleman camper site, it looked like all of the units were over 2000 ils., with exception of the extreme bottom of the line. As I said, all I did was a quick check, and will do some more thorough research when I have sufficient time. (Read: when I stop reading and posting on vehicle forums long enough to go elsewhere!).
    -Bob
  • fargfamfargfam Member Posts: 30
    I picked up my java black 03 XS yesterday after installing the window tint and 3M Clear Shield. I can't even tell you how sharp it looks. My wife loves it too! The Clear Shield looks like it will do its job and you don't notice it at all. Lights, front bumper, front hood, side mirrors and inside door handles have all been protected.

    We also had the upgraded speakers installed and what a major improvement on sound. Plenty of bass, so the subwoofer would probably be overkill. I'll probably put the tweeters in later.

    Happy trails,
    Matt
  • forestergumpforestergump Member Posts: 119
    OK
    I test drove an XT this morning. Let's just say that I'm going to dig in my heels on getting an XT if my wife (or anyone else!) tries to convince me otherwise. A very sweet vehicle! The fact that the new Foresters just got top ranking in safety a few days ago will also go a long way as well.
    -Bob
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Yep, drove one of these too. I really wished I had driven the automatic first.

    By itself, it's a quick, fun ride. Off the line acceleration is very good. Passing is a little slower, mine hesitated to down shift, and lagged a bit in a way the 5 speed did not at all.

    So it feels like a V6, but the 5 speed feels like a V8. It's quicker in every scenario.

    I guess I'll have agree with Ken's review, basically. It was faster than a Vue V6/auto, but then so is the regular Forester X 5 speed.

    Caveat: mine had 12 miles, so it was very, very green. It also had a nearly empty tank of gas, so it had not been filled up, maybe the octane was lower than the 93 we get around here? Finally, the adaptive tranny did not have time to adjust, the test drive was just 6 miles.

    -juice
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    The XT automatic sure felt more powerful than the Outback H6. I think it feels more like a V8.

    Bob
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I'm not sure. The 5 speed was quicker than the H6 in every scenario.

    The auto, I dunno. It might beat it over 3500rpm, for sure, but I'm not sure about idle to 3500. Keep in mind it's been more than a year since I drove the H6, though. Even then my wife did most of the driving, and not much of it was aggressive.

    -juice
  • rsay777rsay777 Member Posts: 100
    my original post #10035 about under the hood vibration at various rpm's was answered by c-hunter #10037 where it was suggested that I look into the Snorkus as the culprit since the vibration seemed to happen after taking apart the air filter housing for inspection.

    I have now isolated the noise to a device on the passenger side firewall that has a sheathed cable running to it and also a wire connector. If I tap on this device it literally sounds like it is full of loose screws. When I get on the engine and get around 5k+ it sounds like something is ready to break loose.

    Anyone have an idea what this device does and why it would start making this RPM related noise.

    Thanks, Bob L
  • once_for_allonce_for_all Member Posts: 1,640
    sounds like the cruise control. When I get a minute, I will pop the hood and look.

    John
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Subaru Crew chat opens in about an hour and a half. Link's at the top.

    Steve, Host
  • kenskens Member Posts: 5,869
    I haven't driven enough V8s to fully qualify my answer, but I'd agree with juice that the XT auto feels more like a small-mid sized V6. Although it pains me to admit it, my wife's Jetta VR6 auto feels like it pulls harder and smoother from 0-60 than the XT auto especially from the 40-60 range. And that's a small 2.5L 174 15-degree V6. Then again, it can be the not-broken-in factor as well.

    Ken
  • rsay777rsay777 Member Posts: 100
    John, I just popped the hood and the device is actually mounted to a bracket on the passenger side just above the wheel post and just in front of the firewall. It has a "J" on it and some kind of a part number. The cable runs forward and under the black plastic tube before it heads on top of the engine where it looks like it is mated to the throttle cable. I haven't used cruise control for awhile but will tomorrow. Now it is time to visit the dealer and convince them I'm not just a overly concerned new car owner, but one that is going nuts from listening to a noise that shouldn't be there. Thanks, Bob L.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I think that Jetta has a 2.8l, FWIW. Plus it's a torquey 2 valve-per-cylinder design. So that's a tough one to match.

    I'm sure high rpm power would be much better with the XT's 4 valves per, AVCS, and of course the intercooled turbo.

    The Jetta is also lighter, plus it's FWD. But the bottom line is I'm sure Ken wants something with more punch, not less. XT manual, you gotta try one. The difference, to me, is substantial.

    -juice
  • c_hunterc_hunter Member Posts: 4,487
    Yep, that's the cruise unit you're describing. Wierd. I'd be curious to know how the cruise control acts when you test it tomorrow.

    I went out to my wife's Forester and took a peek. That unit makes a low humming/rattling noise when I tap on it, but I confess, I don't ever think I have heard it while the engine is running. If yours sounds like it's full of loose screws, then it's definitely worse than what I noticed.

    Craig
  • corkfishcorkfish Member Posts: 537
    I hope the XT feels quicker than the H6 Outbacks because the Outbacks are dogs. Even my Sentra will outrun one. Until I can drive one, I'm waiting and hoping someone will say "it accelerates like a Mustang". Maybe that's asking to much though huh?
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    If it's the NA V6 it's a 2.8 the turbo is a 2.7 IIRC.

    -mike
  • johnb2251johnb2251 Member Posts: 33
    pre-2003 VR6 Jettas are the NA 2.8l 12-valve 178hp/184ftlbs engine. (That's what I have). 2003+ 2.8l VR6 Jettas have 24-valves and ~200hp/torque. I imagine the XT would be faster than the old VR6 and pretty even with the new VR6.

    Also, the Jetta Turbo is a 1.8 liter turbo. Same engine in the Audi TT - just detuned a bit - ~180 hp.
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    The 2.7Turbo was in the S4 IIRC.

    -mike
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Yup, the Jetta got the 1.8T (light-pressure turbo).

    corkfish: I'll say it. The XT 5 speed accelerates like a Mustang GT.

    Happy? I was. ;-)

    -juice
This discussion has been closed.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles

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.