Subaru Forester (up to 2005)

p0926

once_for_all

but I think most of the cranks were 2 armed affairs (2 CCA). My back shudders at the thought.

Juice, how did the SOA session turn out?

John

nygreg

ballistic

1 CCA (Cold Cranking Arm

In his case, it's an old cranking arm. He's going on 70.

officeglen

last week we had several "cool" days we bottomed out at -17F. Wednesday night it'll be -22F. I have had zero problems starting my 03x.

njswamplands

ateixeira

John: check under Owners Clubs, Subaru, then Subaru Crew - Future Models. 100s of posts, literally, in the past week.

I'll summarize by saying I was impressed. The new Legacy added too many things to list, only ommitted a few things (mostly costly items I wouldn't want anyway, like Nav, HID, Mc stereo, etc.).

Notable was the interior. With better plastics and a soft padded fabric headliner (even A-pillar), it does look a lot nicer. Maybe even too nice, I wouldn't want to beat up that interior.

At the same show I sat in the VW Phaeton, and noticed the same material was used for the headliner! :-)

That VW costs slightly more, though. LOL

-juice

raybear

You're right, once you get the hang of it it's a five-minute job.

I have to admit the first one I put in for a customer had me slack-jawed until a tech volunteered to help.

ateixeira

Did you guys here? The new Outback will be registered as a truck, for CAFE purposes and to be able to tint the windows.

That likely means the next Forester will, also.

I guess that levels the playing field, since competitors have exploited this loophole for years.

-juice

ballistic

The line dividing passenger vehicles from trucks obviously needs to be moved. As a minimum, no vehicle with unitized construction should be treated as a truck exempt from CAFE requirements. If it doesn't have a full frame, it's a car.

Or, CAFE rules should apply to trucks.

ateixeira

I think Subaru's move was just to even the playing field.

Compare the Saturn Vue Redline to the XT, same mission and roughly the same real power and fuel efficiency.

Would it be fair if Subaru had to tack on an extra $1000 mark up to offset CAFE penalties, while the Saturn actually earned GM CREDITS to sell gas guzzling Suburbans?

I agree, fix the law, but until them Subaru has chosen to play on a level field.

-juice

tazereli

Has anyone seen an aftermarket retrofit to replace or augment the poor cupholders on the 2002 foresters? I have read subaru has moved the cupholders in 2004-04 foresters. any chance the new cup holders can be fit to the 01/02 foresters?

thanks,

Kyle

dnestr

As a rule in winter AT or any other tranny needs to have a warm before it sets in motion. Is it really necessary in areas where the temperature may be - 10F - 15F in the morning? What time it takes to get the AT warm and can I do it faster if I leave in D holding on the brakes?

thanks in advance,

Regards

nygreg

probably the best thing would be to upgrade your AT fluid to synthetic fluid which flows better at extreme temperatures. Outside of that, I believe the thinking is to warm up vehicle for a minute or two and then drive conservatively until the car is warmed up.

Greg

dane7

My 2002 Forester will sometimes make a loud bang when shifting on snow covered slippery surfaces. I saw the post where joenh received under warranty a new transmission module with different shifting characteristics to lessen or eliminate the bang. I want to have this replacement on mine. I am wondering if there is a service bulletin to reference when I discuss with the dealer. My service manager and dealership are very helpful, but it would be easier to reference a service bulletin. Also, I wonder how effective the new module was in eliminating the problem.

zman

What are the rpm's the XS cranks out at 70 mph in 5th gear (MT) & AT. I read over on the XT site that the it is at about 3000 (MT) and 2800 (AT). Is there that much difference in the XS?

ballistic

The X and XS 5-speed MT Foresters turn nearly the exact same RPMs in top gear at any given speed as the MT XT - about 3,000 RPM at 70MPH. The naturally-aspirated versions use a taller 4.11 final drive, but also have shorter 0.78 5th gear ratios (compared to the XT's 0.738)that almost cancel out any difference.

The automatic in all three cars has the same 0.694 top gear ratio, and all three use the same 4.44 final drive, so the RPMs in top gear will be the same for all three - about 2800 RPM at 70MPH.

The pity is that with roughly half again more horsepower and torque, the XT could easily have pulled a much taller overall top-gear ratio.

p0926

Kyle- Nope, retrofitting the 03-04 cup holders in to an 02 isn’t an option because they are built into the center console next to the emergency brake. If it's any consolation, although your cup holders are in a crummy location and flimsy to boot, mine worked fine for 3 and 1/2 years and never spilled anything on either the radio or AC controls.

-Frank P.

c_hunter

The bang is not cause by the transmission, it's a normal characteristic of the AWD system. I don't see how transmission mods have anything to do with it, since it's not directly tied to shifting -- I can get both of our auto-trans Subarus to bang while in 1st gear without any shifting at all. It has to do with power being transferred aft when the front wheels slip.

Craig

dnestr

thanks for the input.

In these cold days I noticed that the AT works not so smooth as usual during first 5 min., even if I warm up the car for a couple of minutes.

BTW my AT had been upgraded by synthetic fluid.

njswamplands

but ground too frozen to dig

once_for_all

all over the radio news yesterday, there is a major protest going on over SOA trying to sneak it in as a "truck".

This is bad PR for Subaru, I would not think that their overall fleet MPG is so poor that they need to resort to labeling tricks. I am OK with the Baja as a "truck" but forget about the station wagons.

John

ateixeira

I think a lot of it is that the Outback sedan would be classified as a truck, and this would set a bad precedent (hence the headlines).

I say drop the sedan model, it's only 8% of Outback sales, or 3500 yearly. They could easily make it up somewhere else.

-juice

njswamplands

a Sedan Utility Vehicle

raybear

Has sent a letter to dealers explaining their position. The base model is expected to have improved fuel economy.

ballistic

I think it is utterly preposterous for vehicles such as Outbacks - regardless of sedan or wagon body - to escape CAFE requirements by sneaking into the 'truck' classification. In no way should any of these Subaru products, including the Baja, be able to be classified as trucks. If this sham succeeds, then the whole classification scheme should be abandoned and CAFE requirements should be applied to everything weighing less than 2 tons and not providing body-on-full-frame construction.

I think Subaru ought to pay more attention to engineering lower fuel consumption into their model range and less on artificial, superficial, evasive ploys.

raybear

Did you read where I said they plan to have improved fuel economy in the base model?

CAFE should be dumped altogether. There should be consideration for farm and commercial vehicles and that's it.

purduealum91

put a TDI in that outback wagon. Should take care of fuel economy woes and provide plemnty of torque.

kajeco

ballistic

I applaud any MPG improvement in the base model, but will be disappointed in Subaru if they were to stop there. They are on the right track with recent efforts to reduce weight (XT and new Legacy aluminum hoods, bumper beams, roof reinforcements, and so forth). More of that, and stringent engineering focus on improving engine efficiency, is the answer - NOT resorting to a conspicuously transparant reclassification strategy. That is just plain dumb, and if it results in less buyer interest from the environmentalist/outdoorsy types who buy a lot of Subarus, that'll be exactly what they deserve.

I don't mince words: I condemn any attempt by Subaru to evade CAFE requirements by calling any Outbacks 'trucks'.

ateixeira

JB: I disagree, and have a simple explanation.

The CAFE loophole was designed for *WORK* trucks, fleet vehicles, not passenger vehicles. When they say "truck" they really mean "work/fleet commercial vehicle".

So by CAFE standars, even the Ford Excursion does not qualify if it's being bought for use by a family.

The rule is silly so people work around it, everyone does.

Outback has and will continue to have a PZEV model, and by the way the EPA gives it a perfect 10 score. The new one will be more efficient, though I doubt they'll give it an 11 (*).

-juice

* - Spinal Tap reference

p0926

Dang, in how many topics are we going to debate this?

ateixeira

)

-juice

sierratrip

British Rock Star:
(referring to amp volume level)
"Ya see this one goes to 11."

Interviewer:
"Well, why don't you just make the number 10 louder?"

British Rock Star:
(pause)....."ya see this one goes to 11, so that's one louder."

thanks for the laugh Juice!

-Donn

ballistic

I don't see where we disagree. Assuming that a CAFE exemption for work trucks was deemed appropriate (not so sure I agree, but that's another feud), it should be framed in a way that manufacturers were unable/prevented from circumventing CAFE by categorizing as 'trucks' vehicles bought by hundreds of thousands for ordinary family transport. When this phenomenon began several years ago, D.C. should instantly have tightened the rule to prevent the moronic games that have occurred ever since. Having failed to do that, they ought to do it now. Either that, or (my preference) eliminate the exemption altogether and build a set of CAFE rules that apply to, and make sense for, all vehicles of all types.

ateixeira

Indeed we agree, this ridiculous rule has to go, in fact it's actually made mileage worse by forcing people into SUVs.

Economically, this was something Subaru had to do to avoid paying fines. This while the PT Cruiser earns credit for DCX to sell gas guzzling Hemi Durangos.

Dumb law, time to ditch it. Instead of 20.7 for "trucks" and 27.5 for cars, how about 25 mpg for the entire combined fleet?

-juice

njswamplands

lfdal

JB - You want someone in the govt to mandate anything that's actually fair for everyone????

Wow, and I thought I was a dreamer.....

Larry

once_for_all

extends to the window tinting issues. Now, talk about inconsistency... I actually put a plus mark next to the BAJA over my Forester because of the tinted windows.

John

ateixeira

Wanna bet the next Forester is a truck?

We need a new topic, Subaru Crew CAFE! LOL

-juice

nygreg

is up in arms over the OB being reclassified, while Explorers, Trailblazers and Durangos roll off the assembly line for many of these same people. As long as Subaru stays true to its heritage and continues on it's current path, I'm OK with it.

Greg

williamskm

I understand the basic concept of de-humidify the air to aid in defrosting but it was -5 here this morning and I turned the heat to the floor/defrost mode and the A/C came on. The air coming out actually felt colder. I turned the A/C switch off and it continued to defrost the windshield. Is this the way it is supposed to work?
Kim

leo2633

"Sport Utility Tough, TRUCK Easy?"

Len

nygreg

on many cars it's automatic, which you probably know. I agree with you and prefer the AC not come on automatically. I believe some cars will not turn on the AC below a certain temp. It is also possible that the air feels colder because it is hitting the very cold windshield before hitting your face. I watched the temp gauge in my OB go from my 50F heated garage to -2F by the time I got to work.

Stay warm,
Greg

zman

Assuming we accept governement regulations at all, CAFE standards may have made sense in 1975 when there were no such things as minivans or SUV (it addressed the spirit of conservation). What is ludicrous is that well into the 21st century now, legislation has rested on the letter of archaic principles and has not dealt with the evolution of the automobile industry. Hence, the original spirit has been suffocated. Why? Because apparently it is not that important to us, so who cares what Subaru (or any carmaker) does with semantics? If we really cared, we'd figure a way to address the original spirit of conservation.

And the best way to do that is not to buy those cars/trucks, and to buy cars/trucks like Foresters.

p0926

The CAFE standards have remained essentially the same since the 70s because that's what Detroit wants. Plain and simple.

-Frank P.

ballistic

You want someone in the govt to mandate anything that's actually fair for everyone????

I haven't given this a lot of thought, but I think I could support a regimen such as:

Vehicle weight < 2000 lbs: Min MPG 35
Vehicle weight 2-3000 lbs: Min MPG 30
Vehicle weight 3-4000 lbs: Min MPG 25
Vehicle weight 4-5000 lbs: Min MPG 20
Vehicle weight > 5000 lbs: Min MPG 15

..and couple this with a rising weight based tax starting at zero for < 2000 vehicles, rising to maybe $10,000 for each one > 5,000. Or something along those lines. No deviations for whether it's a 'car' or a 'truck'. Additionally, any vehicle that cannot meet those minimum MPG requirements would incur a very hefty gas-guzzler tax.

Obviously, this wouldn't apply to Class 7 Macks, Kenworths, Peterbilts, and so forth. People don't buy those for family transport or running to the grocery store, and never will.

subarusaleshou

except for the "hefty tax" portion. Since my OBS would fall in the third tier it would have to do 25 mpg which it does. Based on your $10,000 tax at level 5, and if the tax is linear, that would put my OBS at $5000 in tax ($0, $2500, $5000, $7500 or $10000).

Of course I'd rather see no tax at all however if it went more like $0, $1k, $2k, $3k and $4k I suppose I'd write it off as I do most government undeserved taxes. Anyway, it's good to see people at least thinking.

zman

The details are negotiable, but what Jack rationally suggests is what the rest of the driving world has been doing for a while.

Frank- You're absolutley right Detroit wants it, but they can do it because "we" let them.

The Mudge

zman

Can anyone guide me to a site that reveals some hard-core specs (gearing ratios, etc.) for Forester XS? I've found lots of technical specs for the XT on other sites, but the XS, I can't find.

-The Mudge