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.
Comments
Option #1 is tires. With the stock rims, you could go to 225/60R16 tires. They are only 6mm higher, though. You might not even notice. Beyond that and you'd have tire clearance problems, they would rub the rear strut base or the front fenders, or both. Price varies by tire, it could be $200-400 or so.
Option #2 is the taller springs from iSR. They fit the 2002 and earlier models, but they had some issues with kajko's 2003 model. So I'd wait to here that his issue was resolved before doing that on a 2003 or 2004 model. They're about $400 and give you a 2" lift.
Option #3 is a lift kit from iSR, but again I'd make sure they fit the 2003 and later models. Again, about $400 for another 2". You could combine these and the springs for a 4" lift, but that changes the dynamics of the vehicles, it'll handle like a truck.
Option #4 is to modify the seat track. You could put spacers and raise the seat a bit, perhaps an inch, and sit higher up. Don't go too crazy or the seat belt and air bag positions would be adversely affected. This is a DIY project and would cost the least, but you may need to do some drilling on a brand-new vehicle, which makes many owners squirm.
I looked that track a while back, the track itself looks riveted to a base. The base is at an angle, which makes it nearly impossible to modify, but you could put spacers between the track and the base. You'd have to remove the rivets and find sturdy bolts or rig something else to hold it in place (it has to be *very* secure).
I think someone with a decent amount of enginuity could do this themselves in half a day or so with some planning. Front headroom is so abundant you could still easily fit. This would actually create more foot room under the seat for rear seat passengers.
The last option is to get something else, something more SUV-like to begin with. Keep in mind these are harder to climb up into.
-juice
raybear responds, "Hmmmm! That's well below invoice on the XT!"
??? XT invoice price is $23,323 including the destination charge. $23,687 is $364 over invoice - not a bad deal, but not under invoice. Mine cost $23,423 plus the additional equipment (at cost) that I specified.
I've told you how I ordered and installed the OEM tweeter kit in five minutes with no problems and a noticeable, if unremarkable, improvement in the sound. And how I bought a pair of Polk EX365 speakers ($49) to replace the front stock speakers and a pair of Polk GX4s ($15) to do the same job on the rear - EVEN THOUGH Crutchfield's site says neither will fit my car. Well, this weekend they were installed with no problems into the stock door housings by a local stereo shop who did the job for $50 and the improvement is remarkably better than I experienced after putting in the tweeters. When I took a look at the cheap little stock speakers Subaru had put in there, I laughed at how shoddy they were. But - one thing always leads to another - now I want more of the better sound! So, I called Polk's customer help line and learned from them that my set up would benefit greatly from an added amplifier that would give me anywhere from 50-75 watts RMS per channel. So, that's what comes next, just as soon as I can find a good 4-channel amp on sale. The stereo guy keeps urging me to replace my whole system, but the CD-cassette-radio combo is getting increasingly rarer and a new one is too pricey to justify it in my mind. I'm hoping a new amp will bring out the best in what's basically a good, albeit underpowered, radio-player. Any specific thoughts a/o recommendations?
Glad to see that someone addressed the seat height issue - now, how about some advice on a DIY job to allow the driver's seat to move further back on its track??? That exposed rail jutting into the rear seat footwell bespeaks lots of extra room to play with - it's a shame to allow it to sit there and go to waste!
to elaborate on juice's list:
currently there's no springs or lift kits for the 2003+ Foresters.
I am in contact with King Springs (who actually manufacture the springs) and they just finished making prototypes. They gave me an estimate of ~5 weeks for shipping to USA. The springs will stiffen your ride a bit, but make the Forester probably at least 1" higher (there's some differences between Australian and NA Foresters).
Eventually, I am thinking of replacing my tires with Pirelli Scorpions 215/65R16 (does anyone have them?!), which would give you another 10mm, but a better lateral bite to the tire.
cheers.
-mike
i am thinking of the S/T's, the AT would be a bit overkill plus no size available for Forester. the S/T's look like a good combo tire, with plenty of bite for nasty roads. this past weekend i was driving on good ole NM clay road while it was raining and although the Geolandars were throwing the mud around pretty well, they did plug up quite easily.
are your Pirelli's pretty noisy? How stiff is the sidewall?
Details at http://media.subaru.com
Interesting that the Legacy outsells the Outback by a wide margin (6,809 vs. 4,727) ... never would have guessed. More Foresters than Outbacks too. I always figured the Outback was their top seller.
I hesitated too long. My wife doesn't like the idea of me getting taller springs for my '98 now, since I keep talking about the XT.
2003 prices were low, and 2004s started arriving, with good supply. So June was indeed a good month.
BTW, their press releases are a little misleading. Total Legacy sales include the Outback, so they only sold 2085 Legacys.
Go to any dealer lot, they have 5 times as many Outbacks as Legacys, so then the numbers add up.
-juice
The power delivery is smooth to the point that you forget there's a turbo there. A tiny bit of lag, but not quite the eternity that one feels when crawling around in 2nd in a WRX and then going full throttle. It's much more daily-driver oriented than the WRX.
One thing I did notice was that the clutch seemed heavier than the WRX or N/A Foresters. The salesperson also commented that the XT's clutch feels more like the MY02/03 WRX. I wouldn't be suprised if there is a higher clamping force pressure plate in the XT.
On my short test drive, I was able to try out a bit of highway driving. The on ramp was a blast. I could never merge with such confidence with my 98 Forester. The throttle response even in 5th gear was very good. There's probably no need to downshift for casual passing activities.
There's been talk about the shorter gearing on the Forester. A quick check at 65mph showed 2500RPM -- the same as my 98 Forester. Is the shorter gearing in the lower gears?
It's still going to be a tough call. The XT beckons me with it's gobs of low-end torque and very nice interior appointments. The WRX wagon still intrigues me with it's sportier handling and better top-end performance. On my way out, I stopped to admire a San Remo Red WRX wagon.
The shopping continues...
Ken
-mike
I guess I must like heavier controls than most. The clutch effort in my XT suits me perfectly, whereas the steering is far too light. If indeed the clutch springs are stronger, good - the clutch will hold up longer.
K:"On my short test drive, I was able to try out a bit of highway driving. The on ramp was a blast."
No lie. I'm still holding mine to 3,000 rpm, but even that makes for stress-free merges.
K: "There's probably no need to downshift for casual passing activities."
Agreed.
K:"There's been talk about the shorter gearing on the Forester. A quick check at 65mph showed 2500RPM -- the same as my 98 Forester. Is the shorter gearing in the lower gears?"
The transmission ratios are unchanged from '03. But your 2500 at 65 is quite different from mine. My tach shows 2,850 at an indicated 65mph, and Car & Driver's test showed almost 3,000 at (presumably) a TRUE 65, corresponding to their observed 21.8mph/1000 in top gear. Is it possible that individual examples of XT 5-speeds have different final drive ratios? That seems extremely unlikely, but these variations are strange.
K:"It's still going to be a tough call. The XT beckons me with it's gobs of low-end torque...the WRX wagon still intrigues me with it's sportier handling and better top-end performance."
For me, it wasn't even a close call. How often will you really use the WRX's peaky top-end performance - and at what penalty in longevity? The XT's broad, flat everyday torque curve sealed the deal.
jb
-mike
Ken: sounds about right, except I didn't notice the heavier clutch. Hmm.
Weird about the tranny ratios. Maybe the speedos are slightly off, that's common. We need a GPS or something.
You gotta ask yourself, is this going to be the family car? If so, the Forester is just going to suit the task better. The higher seating position makes it easier to load an infant carrier, the ones that snap on/off and transfer to the stroller. You won't have to bend over and hurt your back.
I bet it's quieter, probaby rides a lot smoother. For the kids that's a bonus. Later one when you take them to the apple orchards, you won't be bottoming out.
If your wife's car is going to be pulling family duties most of the time, then sure, go for a WRX wagon for yourself. You'll manage, but I really think you'll be taking all your trips in your wife's bigger car.
-juice
The thing is, the variances are much more than I'd expect individual speedo nuances could explain. Ken's 2,500 at 65 works out to 26mph/1000 in top gear. Car & Driver observed only 21.8 (presumably on a corrected speedo). That is a HUGE difference - nearly 20%! Mine, on the other hand, appears to go roughly 22.8 <indicated> mph per thousand - somewhat better than C&D's, but FAR below what Ken observed.
Maybe I'll have time this weekend to check my speedo's calibration against 10 miles of mileposts. In the meantime, these large differences are puzzling at the least.
Yesterday while heading home on a 6-lane road I came to a red light. I was in the rightmost lane; a kid in a Mustang was on my left. My lane disappeared about 800 feet ahead. The light went green, and the kid decided he wasn't going to let the old grey fart in the stodgy sliver wagon get in front of him.
His eyes in my rearview mirror were big, round, and surprised. The Forester XT RULES!
jb
-juice
I haven't seen anyone mention availability of XT brochures, but I got one from the dealer (in Eugene Oregon) who said that they had just come in that day. It's a full sized, multi-page Forester brochure which covers all models, but devotes the most space to the XT. Nice.
My test drive was big-fun. I tried to be easy on the green engine. It had 16 miles on the clock when we started out. The sales guy said, "go ahead and take it to redline if you feel like it" BEFORE the engine was even fully warmed up (YIKES!). I explained why that was not a terrific idea. So I drove moderately.
Later, at a stoplight, I had a green but did not realize that it was a "yield to oncoming traffic" until I had already started my turn. (Perhaps a little distracted by the XT and the yammering sales guy). When I realized my error, the oncoming driver had hesitated, so rather than stop in the middle of the intersection, half-blocking the through traffic, I nailed the throttle.
WHOA MAMA, HOLD THE PHONE!!!!!!!!!! I had no idea. This thing is seriously fast. My 2wd V6 Tacoma is quick (0-60 in 7.1), but it can't turn and accelerate hard without spinning the inside tire. The XT just GOES... right now. You gotta love AWD.
-james
juice: Yes, the clutch did feel stiffer. My 98 has always had a stiffer feel compared to every other Forester I've ever driven and the XT was right up there.
Man, leave it to you to sway me back into the XT camp. ;-) No, this vehicle (whatever I buy) will not be the family vehicle. It'll be 80% my commuter and 20% for family duty. While it is our plan to have my wife (eventually) drive a bigger car, you raise a good point that that would mean we would only be able to travel with one vehicle. I'll have to do the car seat test one of these days.
The XT was indeed very quiet inside. NVH is greatly improved over my 98. The ride was very close to that of my 98 -- firm but not bone-jarring. It would indeed amount to a much more family-friendly cruiser.
The one thing I noticed that was odd was that the silver colored roof rails have body-color matched front tips. The auto I first drove was silver, but yesterday's was a black XT. The black/silver combination of the roof rails looked a bit awkward. Silver is still by far my favorite color for the XT.
Ken
For 20% of the family duty, the WRX wagon will be fine.
So now you have to ask, do you want the handling of the WRX, or the torque of the 2.5T? Tough choice...
-juice
PS I agree about the roof rack. The silver one looks like it's just metal, so it blends in the best. That's an XT-only feature, I believe, the painted rails.
since I consider you the resident Subaru expert, have you heard anything about the 2.5L turbo XT motor replacing the 2.0L Turbo in the WRX (non-STi)? Do you think that there will still be a requirement for a 2.0L in the WRX because of international homologation rules? This requirement doesn't exactly make sense in light of the North American STi v.s. the one available overseas (i.e. 2.5L v.s. 2.0L). What is your perspective? Thanks,
I'm not doubting what you saw, Ken. I'm only saying that the difference between C&D's 21.8mph/1000 in 5th versus your 26.0mph/1000 is huge (about 20%) and is much more than can reasonably be attributed to speedo error. There are at least two new-car-specification type websites that still list the XT's final drive ratio as 4.11, and none that I've found that would confirm C&D's 4.44. Therefore, I'm still very hazy on what "real" final drive ratio is in the XTs that are being sold to real customers. I won't be able to say much more until I verify the speedo calibration<error> on mine, so that I can say with certainty what its true mph/1000 figure really is. If it proves to be higher than C&D's 21.8, so much the better.
I haven't yet filled my tank for the first time; the needle was on 'E' all the way home yesterday, and this morning the low-fuel light finally came on. According to the owner's manual, that means I still should have about 2.3 gallons in the tank, meaning I've burned about 13.6 or so. I've driven 280 miles. That's only about 20.6 MPG. My daily driving is about 2/3 freeway, 1/3 suburban, and ALL of my driving on this tankful has been light throttle/moderate revs. The car will probably never be driven that lightly again. This doesn't augur well for real-world XT fuel consumption numbers.
K > "The one thing I noticed that was odd was that the silver colored roof rails have body-color matched front tips. The auto I first drove was silver, but yesterday's was a black XT. The black/silver combination of the roof rails looked a bit awkward. Silver is still by far my favorite color for the XT."
This was something I pointed out 'way back when I looked over the first XT <black> to arrive in Portland. The aluminum-finished rails with body-color end-caps look fine on a silver XT. On any other color, the effect is odd - like an afterthought.
I have 'discovered' something. Though I'm only 5'11", I've always put the seat all the way back (and often tilted the seatback rearward, too) in practically everything I've ever owned, because I prefer an arms-straight-out driving position. With the Forester's driver's seat in that position, there is essentially no kneeroom in the back. Recognizing that, I've begun retraining myself to drive the Forester with the seat about 2/3 back and the backrest a bit more upright - and I've also cranked the seat almost to its max height. Adjusted thus, I can actually sit 'behind' myself in reasonable comfort in the rear. And putting the other front seat even farther forward (my wife is 5'6") makes the right-side rear seat even more comfortable. So - the back seat is not as bad as I initially thought.
I can't wait to take mine in for its first checkup. There's a buzzy rattle someplace in the dash that's driving me bonkers.
I like to drive very smoothly, launching with minimum revs and minimum clutch slip. I still find that with the XT's first-gear ratio so low, this car requires too much concentration to launch smoothly, and the first-to-second gearchange (which comes up almost immediately) similarly requires more concentration than it should. Other gearchanges are fine. I'm still wishing for a 6th freeway gear, though.
The ride quality (and cornering in ordinary brisk maneuvers) is really growing on me. I realize many (maybe even most) others seek a different trade-off between ride and ultimate cornering limits, but my XT gives just about exactly the balance I prefer.
jb
But I dunno, that would kill Subaru's CAFE numbers. The WRX sells in enough volume that they'd be paying some serious fines.
They were already at the very limit, 27.5 fleet average (using CAFE's bizarre method of calculation). I don't see how 18/23 mpg is going to help.
I believe the homologation rules were relaxed, so I don't think that's what is holding them back. My guess is CAFE is.
Also, the MT gears may not be able to withstand that torque, especially since WRX owners are far more likely to modify their engines. Subaru would be inviting a powertrain headache.
-juice
I also found that during my test drive. I had one slightly embarassing moment where I lurched back and forth from a stoplight. The fellow behind me probably thought I was learning how to drive stick!
The 1-2 gear change, however felt similar to what I've experienced with other MT Subies.
Ken
I started a pro-2.5 WRX discussion over at nasioc (News & Rumors area) a few days ago.
Besides myself, and a few other (rather weak) supporters, I'm getting beaten up over there by those who think the 2.0 is "fast enough." Can you believe that, coming from gearheads!?!? I bet most of the naysayers also said a 2.5 STi would never happen...
Bob
Ask people that have not yet bought a WRX due to a lack of low end torque, and it would be nearly unanimous in favor.
-juice
Bob
Any thoughts on this? It's beginning to drive us crazy.
Bob
What's the tread look like on the rear tires? What tire pressures do you run?
Please jog my memory -- did you replace all four?
I hate to say it, but if the tires look fine and you're getting a roaring noise, it sounds like the wheel bearing issue has reared it's ugly head.
Ken
The cupping was hard to spot at first, as I didn't expect to have worn tires with so few miles. The cupping was most evident when I pulled into the garage or driveway and there were light and dark spots across the tread -- from where different parts of the tire had contacted the garage surface. The tire store immediately recognized the wear pattern, but could not explain how it happened. The pressures were always within spec, they were rotated every 5-6K, and the car's alignment was perfect. Weird.
Brian
* tire pressures
* re-balance
* rotate
If you want, come over some time and you can borrow that pressure washer we talked about while you're at it. We can go for a test ride, and I have a tire gauge and enough tools to do a 15 minute tire rotation (torqued to spec to boot).
-juice
The car was just in for the 45K service, and tire rotation is part of the deal, I believe. In fact, this noise started just after we got the car back from that service...
The sound starts around 40 mph or so.
Bob
Asia Africa Intelligence Wire, April 30, 2003 pNA
PROFILE OF CHEVROLET FORESTER 2.0X FROM SUBARU (the vehicle, which costs Rs18,50,000 on road in Mumbai, has an overall fuel economy of 9.1 kilometres per litre).
COPYRIGHT 2003 Financial Times
http://www.reachouthyderabad.com/business/biznews/gmi.htm
This is the first I've heard about it in Africa. If this is true, it's only is some African countries, because the Subaru Forester is sold in South Africa, as well other areas too.
Bob
Another possibility is that some kind of tire imperfection like tread separation is starting to happen.
Could you go to the store you bought the tires from and have them inspect/balance them?
Ken
Bob
Is it speed dependent? Our 626 went chunk-chunk-chunk and the pitch increased with speed, proportionally. Thankfully Subaru's warranty is longer than most.
-juice
For what it's worth, when my GPS says my 2003 XS 5-speed is going 70 mph, the tach is just about pegged on the 3000 rpm mark.
Spencer
Mark
Gee, I love Asian press releases, particularly South Asian ones.
The Japanese do a fine line in transliterating Japanese concepts, which are often very aesthetic, with emotional overtones, into english script. I was particularly taken with a T-shirt I saw on a Japanese cyclist in New Zealand some years ago which was covered in very cool text covering things like "ride with the wind, leap like a tiger, sweep like a samurai". It looks weird initailly but when you understand the culture, the language reflects it.
Indian culture is fascinating. perspectives are passionately argued, with good humour for other's differing stance. English is the language of its past Imperialist rulers, but the emotion of the culture comes through. I am fortunate to chair some community groups with Indian colleagues and am always grateful for their passion.
I wonder how Foresters will sell in India. The car of choice is typically a Hindustan Ambassador which is derived froma 1948 Morris Oxford. It weighs a bit over 1500kg (3300lb) and is powered by a small Isuzu diesel or 1.8l petrol engine.
The Forester could be quite a shock to the locals who make up about one fifth of the world's population. To give you some idea of the range try the link http://www.hmambassador.com/colors.asp
Cheers
Graham
Bob
My mountain bike measures 41" from the ground to the top of the handlebars (front wheel on). And 67" front tip of front wheel to back tip of back. Am wondering if it will fit upright, with the front wheel on, in the back of the Forester? If not upright, then on a diagonal? Sooner or later, I'll have to go 'outside' with the trailer hitch or rooftop rack for longer trips or if the back is loaded - but just to take the bike out to the sticks for a day-ride - it would sure be sweet if I could just pop the hatch and slide 'er in. Can always remove the front wheel if 41" x 67" is just too much of a squeeze.
Also, anybody know of or use a rig to hold their bike(s) inside the 'cargo hold'? Bungies & Tie-downs?
Reckon somebody here pops a bike or two in the back...
again, TIA!
-srp
I bet the Forester will cost a small fortune in India, probably more than twice the cost of those Ambassadors. And worth it!
-juice
The only drawback to this set up is the fact that the bikes are not very stable. I bungeed my bikes down, but after a few spirited turns, they ended up leaning on top of each other.
One idea that I had that I did not pursue yet was to mount my Yakima Steelhead racks on some roundbar (even a cut off broom handle), place that inside the Forester and then mount the bikes to it.
Ken
Oddly, this is most noticeable when you rotate tires in a cross pattern, which means you are changing the rotation direction of two of the tires. Subaru recommends rotating front to back so the direction of rotation would not be changing.
Make sure the rotation was strictly front to back, and have the wheels rebalanced.
Craig
Is there some reasoning behind Subaru recommending a front-to-back tire rotation pattern?
Every tire specialist I've spoken to has told me that as long as the tires are not directional, they can be rotated in a cross pattern. I think Subaru is just being conservative by recommending a pattern that will work with all tires.
Ken
Bob
Thanks,
David
I'm aware of only three changes between the '03 XS and the '04: The MSRP for the '04 increased $50, the destination (shipping) charge increased by (don't quote me, I don't have the exact figure at my fingertips) about $25-35, and (unlike the '03) the radios in '04 Foresters no longer include cassette players.
jb