It just needs some tweaking on interior room. I had one and the back seat is cramped. Now I have a WRX wagon and the back seat is better than my previous Forester. If you want the "Excursion" sized Subaru then buy the Outback. The extra foot of length should be enough.
don't call my Outback an Excursion! That's like an insult!
remember, the Forester does have quite the cargo area for it's size. but, I agree, tweak the interior a bit to give those in the back a bit more leg room. just don't super-size it - it's not necessary.
Mike- I'm saying that the Forester is fine for transporting four adults for short trips. Maybe not four 6"4 250 pound males but certainly two couples. Sure a couple of inches more legroom in the back would be nice but not worth it IMO if the trade-off is noticeably bigger external dimensions. And yes actually, I'd love to see a 2-door option for the Forester. My Cherokee was a 2-door and I think that the 2-door models just looked sportier while still maintaining the utility.
BTW, I didn't say the next Forester was going to be Excursion-size, only that if the current super-sizing fad continues that it will "eventually" grow that large. Of course your Trooper is already well on it's the way :-)
Well I just know of a few people who I took to look at foresters, and they commented how they couldn't go out with 2 couples in it and therefore decided against the forester for that exact reason "I love the forester, except that when we go out with your mom and dad, we wouldn't be able to fit both couples comfortably in the car" That was what my dad's buddy said to me after I took him to look at the forester.
Actually I'd like my Trooper to be about 8"-9" longer, and 8" wider and put a small V8 DOHC in there. It would then be perfect.
can't the Forester remain what it is - a compact, fairly agile, fun, pleasant AWD station wagon. I would definitely NOT have purchased Rufus if he had been any larger. Like the majority of people, most of my driving involves 0 or 1 passenger. I have numerous times had 2 and occasionally had 3 passengers for short trips and the room has been adequate (I'm 6'). If I had a family that rode together frequently and only one car, the Forester would not have been my choice. With my usage (mainly urban driving with some dirt "road" work) the current models smaller dimensions are greatly appreciated (ease of parking, maneuverability, reasonable gas mileage, good acceleration and braking). If Subaru wants to build a "Grand Forester" (a mistake in my opinion - the market is already too crowded) fine, but don't take away the present concept. It's a good one. (My $.25 CnD)
Anyone know if these are exorbitant? The retail price of the biturbo Legacy in those markets is only the equivalent of US$29-30K. I was wondering if Subaru pegs the car price low due to very high taxes which is a pricing strategy used a lot by manufacturers in high tax nations or they would have no sales.
Maybe it's a Frank thing. I also would prefer a 2 door Forester, easier for me to get in and out of. That, and give me another inch or so of back travel for the seat, and I would smile even more.
It is interesting that the only other vehicle I considered was the 2 door Cherokee, until I drove it. It was old, crude, and I had no place for my left foot. Outside of that it was perfect.
Brian, sorry, any reference to Ford on a Subaru board is quite an insult. On the subject of a two door Forester, I don't think it will happen. Think about the 2002 models. Subaru now has absolutely no 2 door model in their entire line up. (You gotta love how despite the GM connection these guys still march to their own drummer.) Again I still think that there is great potential to get more legroom in the Forester without added exterior dimensions. Honda does this over and over in each generation of Civic.
I'll admit that I'm biased towards 2-doors. In fact, the Forester is my first 4-door primary driver. Prior to it I had a Cherokee and a succession of 2-door hatchbacks (5).
Actually, I bought the Forester in spite of the fact that it had 4 doors. My first preference was a 2000 version of my 5-MT 2-door 4x4 4.0L Cherokee. Only after it became apparent that this particular model was impossible to get (after trying for 7 months) did I expand my search. Of course it only took a brief test drive to convince me that the Forester was the way to go as its handling and ride were light years ahead of the Cherokee's!
Twrx- Oh I agree.... a snowball has a better chance in Death Valley in the summer than the odds of Subaru offering a 2-door Forester. I was merely expressing my personal preferences.
If the Forester becomes as large as, or larger than, the Legacy without a corresponding increase in power, my next Subaru may well be (gasp!) a WRX wagon. The Forester's power-to-weight ratio was the primary factor in choosing it over the Legacy GT wagon.
The current Forester has acceptable torque but could stand an additional 20-25 hp. The WRX drivetrain would not supply the necessary torque curve for those who haul or tow - someone from a non-North American market please rebut me if I'm mistaken. Legacy owners will need the towing/hauling torque which the H-6 apparently provides. If the H-6 shows up in the GT it should be tuned to pick up a few more hp than the same engine in the Outback series, as befits its more sporting character.
Ed- I think the overwhelming majority agrees that the next Forester will not only grow but will also get either the 3.0L H-6 or a turbo.
My dream Forester would be a 2-door version of the existing model with the rear strut towers moved to increase the rear seat room and a light-pressure turbo putting out 190-200 HP offered as an option for the existing 2.5L H-4. It would run circles around every other vehicle in its class! Okay, I'll wake-up now :-(
Ed, an H6 Legacy GT with a mt 5 would be a dream car. I think the H6 equipped GT would give the car the high performance it deserves but keep it different from the WRX. Think that combo would be great competition for expensive German sport sedans and wagons. As to trading a forester for a wrx--been there done that!
I think Foresters definitely could use a boost in rear seat legroom. That's probably the most common complaint -- on a rather short list -- I've seen against them. But I tend to agree that it seems like this could probably be achieved with some design tweaking to the Forester's interior, with very minimal impact on the overall dimensions. That'd be my personal ideal, since I consider my Forester's backseat leg space a bit too tight for me (fortunately, of course, I'm rarely back there), but have no absolutely desire for a substantially bigger, heavier and more expensive Forester.
At the same time, though, I wonder if there might be enough of a U.S. market for both the current compact Forester (perhaps borrowing that Canadian "Forester Sport" label) alongside a bigger, more upscale Forester (the old "Grand Forester" theory, though I'd hope for a better name). The Impreza-based "Forester Sport" could be the entry-level and maybe more performance-oriented (with a turbo option, maybe) vehicle, while the Legacy-based "Grand Forester" (with H6, perhaps) could attract buyers who might otherwise feel obliged to buy the bigger competing SUVs, such as the Highlander or, God forbid, the Explorer.
Finally, I also agree that an H6 Legacy GT would be a great sports sedan, and one that would attract a broader market of shoppers than the current H4 -- and might even have greater appeal to most American drivers than a twin-turbo version.
But another option might be to offer both a twin-turbo H4 Legacy GT and an H6 Outback Sedan, which could provide a little more market differentiation between the vehicles, especially for the Outback Sedan. I'd also like to see one or both offered with a VDC option. But I think that'd really need to be done at a much more reasonable price than you now have fork over for an Outback VDC.
As an owner of a Forester (a.k.a. "The Toaster"), I definitely agree that the rear seating in marginal at best.
What I'm hoping will happen is that the '03 Forester will get a similar rear seating arrangement that is now found on the new Rav4, and the about to be released new CRV. By that I mean:
• A split rear seat that can be moved fore and aft—just like your front seat. And...
• A reclining backrest.
Offering those features will make a world of difference in rear seat room and comfort. BTW, the new Rav4, actually has a shorter wheelbase than the Forester, yet it has more rear seat legroom, and is more comfortable—because of those just mentioned features.
I agree that a SLIGHTLY larger Forester might be a good thing. Just enough to increase the rear legroom a bit and maybe stretch the wheelbase a couple of inches, but no more.
I really hope GM doesn't gain influence over Subaru. They have already manged to ruin Saab. First, even though Saab had the 900 replacement (now called the 9-3) partially designed, GM insisted that Saab use existing GM of Europe parts. Saab engineers were not satisfied with either Opel platform, so they decided to take components from both. Unfortunately, after the new design was out, Opel decide to abandon one of the platforms, leaving the Saab design an orphan. Thus, there was no particular cost advantage in having used it.
Worse, using that platform resulted in the new car being smaller than the old, with a crapmed driving position and 6 inches less cargo space in the hatch. Plus, the cargo floor is no longer flat and the speaker mounts interefere with loading. The marque has gone upscale, with Lexus-like pricing and service costs. And the company has not introduced all wheel drive, in spite of customer requests.
That is why I bought a Forester. It has the flat load floor and more room for the driver, plus AWD. Remeber that GM is the company of Alfred P. Sloan, whose famous quote is: "What's good for General Motors is good for the USA." In other words, we will tell you what you want and you will buy it.
As for Ford, I don't know what possessed them to make the Explorer larger. They already had the largest SUV in the world in their lineup, so why did they need another monster?
I saw a Subaru infomercial on the Speedvision cable channel yesterday. They showed all the current models and had a subaru V.P. discussing the Subaru brand as the All wheel drive and "premium" mark that Subaru stood for. Anyway the brat type vehicle was a four door with a short pick up bed that was mostly tacked on past the rear wheels. Basically a cabin like the current Legacy platform I think, with some extra body tacked on for the bed. They diddn't say much about the engine and showed commercial type video of it driving through beaches ect. The ride hieght wasn't more than current subarus.
It looks like a segment buster for drivers who wan't a pick up that doesn't handle like a pick up. I doubt it will come cheap though.
Yeah, we're all aware of the new BRAT; been following it (a.k.a. ST-X concept) since it was introduced a the LA Auto Show 1.5 years ago. The final production version will be introduced at the Detroit Auto Show this January, and will be in showrooms the following October.
Needless to say, it's a much anticipated new vehicle. I just hope Subaru gives it a bit more capability (towing & payload) than what's currently available in the Outback and Forester.
The switchback design is being dropped, and the rear overhang behind the rear axle causes the angle of departure to be quite bad, just like the rest of the subarus. That's about the only problem with subarus as off-road vehciles, they need to have better angles of approach and departure. Although 3 subies did great int he pine barrens of NJ today http://isuzu-suvs.com/events for full coverage of our SIA Pre-run Trail-ride. Hopefully some of the NJ people here can make the ride next week.
With 8.5 inches of ground clearance, it seems as if Subaru wants it to be taken off road. Take a look at a picture of the Brat with its doors opened- the window pillars are metal and are one piece with the doors themselves. This thing is designed to take a beating.
But isn't the front overhand a bit long, making the angle of approach quite low?
It looks like Europe is getting two versions of the WRX-STi: The base model (if you can call it "base"), and ProDrive version, as well. They're going on sales in January. Lucky Europeans!
Also, a Subaru pickup concept is to be shown: Hmmm... I wonder if it will be a close-to-production version of the BRAT, or just the same concept ST-X that was shown at LA two years ago?
Does anyone know if they are going to offer different versions of the ST-X like the Forester L & S models. I would like to see some unpainted lower body cladding like the forester because my S model has taken a beating on the East Kootenay roads (in one year I've toasted both fog lights, a headlight and a windsheild from stones)from rock chips.
Curious if that yellow comes over to North America, and if it does if it's a sharp yellow as that appears to be... The Blase' Yellow we got this year was the same as previous JDM Imprezas had, but I didn't like it then or now.
Too bad thats just the Japanese STi I do hope that all the cars get that new grill though, its so much nicer and gets rid of those funky 2 little things between the lights and the grill.
Four wheel drive and a dry sump to lower center of gravity. Well, Subaru has known that for many years, reducing center of gravity through engine design and the benefits of AWD.
Daniel
PS. The article is from South Africa, so word usage and spelling may seem foreign.
Besides the two European ST-i models, Subaru showed a new small concept vehicle, the HM-01, at the Frankfurt Auto Show. It's a 4WD hybrid, with a distinctly "European" look to it. I like it. It bodes well for future Subaru styling IMO.
Saw the new CR-V. It may match the 1998 Forester, but remember the Subie is at the end of its life cycle. That it can stand up to a brand new Honda design 5 years later says a lot.
The amount of pressure on Subaru is becoming hard to believe. Everyone will soon have AWD wagons, a niche basically owned by Subaru until a few years ago. They really have their work cut out for them. These niches were left alone for years, but now the giant mainstream companies are joining the party, and they have deep pockets.
I like the WRX as it is: quirky and controversial. Imagine the opposite - plain and boring.
The wife got a $50 offer to drive a big Buick, so we asked to drive a Rendezvous instead (had to drive something). For the most part I wasn't impressed.
The V6 is coarse, slow, and not efficient either. The 3rd seat works, but leaves no cargo room at all. The driver's seat was uncomfy, and the faux carbon fiber trim was the least convincing I've ever seen. Handling was boat-like, though at least the ride was smooth.
Another "me-too" SUV. Buick buyers may like it, though.
how people react to various vehicles. As they say: "One man's passion is another man's poison."
The HM-01 is down right conservative, as compared to the alien-inspired Moonster... This just an observation, not a criticism. Actually, I like both vehicles.
The US typically turns their back to cars like the HM-01. I can't help but think that new Honda Model X concept, the really upright box-shaped one, is going to fail when it reaches production.
Then again, it's not aimed at my generation. Maybe if we don't get it, we're too old for it.
Wait a minute. ...This is a part of their plan to reduce development costs by introducing sister models of their current lineup (the first model was the Traviq). ...
Comments
-mike
remember, the Forester does have quite the cargo area for it's size. but, I agree, tweak the interior a bit to give those in the back a bit more leg room. just don't super-size it - it's not necessary.
-Brian
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
BTW, I didn't say the next Forester was going to be Excursion-size, only that if the current super-sizing fad continues that it will "eventually" grow that large. Of course your Trooper is already well on it's the way :-)
-Frank P.
Actually I'd like my Trooper to be about 8"-9" longer, and 8" wider and put a small V8 DOHC in there. It would then be perfect.
-mike
Ross
I completely agree. Not everyone needs a big vehicle and the Forester suits a lot of needs short of a big family.
It's become almost of a cliche with new model turns. They always are bigger, get more power and have more cupholders.
Ken
It is interesting that the only other vehicle I considered was the 2 door Cherokee, until I drove it. It was old, crude, and I had no place for my left foot. Outside of that it was perfect.
Regards,
this Frank
Actually, I bought the Forester in spite of the fact that it had 4 doors. My first preference was a 2000 version of my 5-MT 2-door 4x4 4.0L Cherokee. Only after it became apparent that this particular model was impossible to get (after trying for 7 months) did I expand my search. Of course it only took a brief test drive to convince me that the Forester was the way to go as its handling and ride were light years ahead of the Cherokee's!
-Frank P.
-Frank P.
The current Forester has acceptable torque but could stand an additional 20-25 hp. The WRX drivetrain would not supply the necessary torque curve for those who haul or tow - someone from a non-North American market please rebut me if I'm mistaken. Legacy owners will need the towing/hauling torque which the H-6 apparently provides. If the H-6 shows up in the GT it should be tuned to pick up a few more hp than the same engine in the Outback series, as befits its more sporting character.
Okay, no use beating a dead horse.
Ed
My dream Forester would be a 2-door version of the existing model with the rear strut towers moved to increase the rear seat room and a light-pressure turbo putting out 190-200 HP offered as an option for the existing 2.5L H-4. It would run circles around every other vehicle in its class! Okay, I'll wake-up now :-(
-Frank P.
At the same time, though, I wonder if there might be enough of a U.S. market for both the current compact Forester (perhaps borrowing that Canadian "Forester Sport" label) alongside a bigger, more upscale Forester (the old "Grand Forester" theory, though I'd hope for a better name). The Impreza-based "Forester Sport" could be the entry-level and maybe more performance-oriented (with a turbo option, maybe) vehicle, while the Legacy-based "Grand Forester" (with H6, perhaps) could attract buyers who might otherwise feel obliged to buy the bigger competing SUVs, such as the Highlander or, God forbid, the Explorer.
Finally, I also agree that an H6 Legacy GT would be a great sports sedan, and one that would attract a broader market of shoppers than the current H4 -- and might even have greater appeal to most American drivers than a twin-turbo version.
But another option might be to offer both a twin-turbo H4 Legacy GT and an H6 Outback Sedan, which could provide a little more market differentiation between the vehicles, especially for the Outback Sedan. I'd also like to see one or both offered with a VDC option. But I think that'd really need to be done at a much more reasonable price than you now have fork over for an Outback VDC.
What I'm hoping will happen is that the '03 Forester will get a similar rear seating arrangement that is now found on the new Rav4, and the about to be released new CRV. By that I mean:
• A split rear seat that can be moved fore and aft—just like your front seat. And...
• A reclining backrest.
Offering those features will make a world of difference in rear seat room and comfort. BTW, the new Rav4, actually has a shorter wheelbase than the Forester, yet it has more rear seat legroom, and is more comfortable—because of those just mentioned features.
Bob
I really hope GM doesn't gain influence over Subaru. They have already manged to ruin Saab. First, even though Saab had the 900 replacement (now called the 9-3) partially designed, GM insisted that Saab use existing GM of Europe parts. Saab engineers were not satisfied with either Opel platform, so they decided to take components from both. Unfortunately, after the new design was out, Opel decide to abandon one of the platforms, leaving the Saab design an orphan. Thus, there was no particular cost advantage in having used it.
Worse, using that platform resulted in the new car being smaller than the old, with a crapmed driving position and 6 inches less cargo space in the hatch. Plus, the cargo floor is no longer flat and the speaker mounts interefere with loading. The marque has gone upscale, with Lexus-like pricing and service costs. And the company has not introduced all wheel drive, in spite of customer requests.
That is why I bought a Forester. It has the flat load floor and more room for the driver, plus AWD. Remeber that GM is the company of Alfred P. Sloan, whose famous quote is: "What's good for General Motors is good for the USA." In other words, we will tell you what you want and you will buy it.
As for Ford, I don't know what possessed them to make the Explorer larger. They already had the largest SUV in the world in their lineup, so why did they need another monster?
It looks like a segment buster for drivers who wan't a pick up that doesn't handle like a pick up. I doubt it will come cheap though.
Needless to say, it's a much anticipated new vehicle. I just hope Subaru gives it a bit more capability (towing & payload) than what's currently available in the Outback and Forester.
Bob
1.
The brat ( ST-X ) has higher ground clearance than
other trucks.
2.
The only car-based truck
3.
Very nice reviews already about it already.
4.
the bed can expand unbelievably.
5.
check out at http://www.subaru.com/st-x
6.
this will be another WRX type hit for Subaru.
-mike
Take a look at a picture of the Brat with its doors opened- the window pillars are metal and are one piece with the doors themselves. This thing is designed to take a beating.
But isn't the front overhand a bit long, making the angle of approach quite low?
Also, a Subaru pickup concept is to be shown: Hmmm... I wonder if it will be a close-to-production version of the BRAT, or just the same concept ST-X that was shown at LA two years ago?
http://www.autonewseurope.com/2001frankfurt/subaru910.htm
Bob
Bob
Dennis
Stephen
Bob
http://i-club.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=90638
Don't blink, you might miss it. :-)
Dennis
-Colin
I do hope that all the cars get that new grill though, its so much nicer and gets rid of those funky 2 little things between the lights and the grill.
I am not very impressed with looks
..Mike
..Mike
The new Lamborghini Murciélago:
http://dieburger.com/News24/Wheels24/0,3999,2-15_1078115,00.html
Four wheel drive and a dry sump to lower center of gravity. Well, Subaru has known that for many years, reducing center of gravity through engine design and the benefits of AWD.
Daniel
PS. The article is from South Africa, so word usage and spelling may seem foreign.
Bob
http://www.subaru.co.jp/impreza/sportswagon/index.html
Bob
http://www.autonewseurope.com/2001frankfurt/index.html
http://www.veh-tech.net/
Bob
The amount of pressure on Subaru is becoming hard to believe. Everyone will soon have AWD wagons, a niche basically owned by Subaru until a few years ago. They really have their work cut out for them. These niches were left alone for years, but now the giant mainstream companies are joining the party, and they have deep pockets.
I like the WRX as it is: quirky and controversial. Imagine the opposite - plain and boring.
The wife got a $50 offer to drive a big Buick, so we asked to drive a Rendezvous instead (had to drive something). For the most part I wasn't impressed.
The V6 is coarse, slow, and not efficient either. The 3rd seat works, but leaves no cargo room at all. The driver's seat was uncomfy, and the faux carbon fiber trim was the least convincing I've ever seen. Handling was boat-like, though at least the ride was smooth.
Another "me-too" SUV. Buick buyers may like it, though.
-juice
Man, notice that Citroen? They make some truly hideous cars!
-juice
Now, the Peugeot Moonster! There is a vehicle!
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
The HM-01 is down right conservative, as compared to the alien-inspired Moonster... This just an observation, not a criticism. Actually, I like both vehicles.
Bob
Then again, it's not aimed at my generation. Maybe if we don't get it, we're too old for it.
-juice
Bob
There are Boomers, then Gen X, then Gen Y or Echo Boomers. I'm Gen X, but the Honda Model X would appeal more to the Gen Y.
Maybe they should call it the Model Y, then? The name Echo is already taken. Boomer is a Q-back that went to my school (U of MD).
-juice
Bob
Bob
http://www.veh-tech.net/
...This is a part of their plan to reduce development costs by introducing sister models of their current lineup (the first model was the Traviq). ...
Isn't the Traviq that GM POS?