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
" APPLICABILITY: 2009MY Forester NUMBER: 07-63-08
SUBJECT: Spot Map Light DATE: 06/26/08
INTR0DUCTI0N
The spot map light illuminates when any of the doors or rear gate is opened. The light remains ON for several seconds and gradually turns OFF after all the doors and/or rear gate is closed or if the ignition key is turned to the ON position. If you encounter a customer that would like the feature turned off, please follow the procedure listed below.
INFORMATION
The off delay cut connector is located in the interior of the vehicle next to the blower motor. Disconnect the off delay cut (black) connector B465 & B466 from each other. When the connectors are disconnected, the spot map light will not illuminate unless manually operated with the switches on the light."
Given a tire diameter of say, 27", with a circumference of 84.8". Let's say you have burned off 5/32" of tire tread, and you get a flat. The new tire diameter will be 27-5/32-5/32, with a circumference of 83.8". If you put a fresh tire on there, it will have a diameter of 84.8" ... outside of tolerance, and subjecting your AWD system to damage.
I think this is why they recommend if you get a flat with the AT, that you put the spare on the back, and pull the fuse to put the car in FWD mode.
I'm not sure what the MT people are recommended to do.
I'm also not sure what this means if you get an un-repairable flat, with your tires worn at 40-50%... does that mean you need to buy 4, because 1 is dead?
Anyone know?
It is my understanding that yes, if you get an unrepairable flat worn at your suggested 40-50%, you will need to buy 4 new tires.
That is part of the reason that the 5th full size tire is good for the AWD.
If you have a full size spare, you can rotate the 5th spare tire into place every time that you rotate your tires, so none of them will be too far out of tolerance. Then, if you do get an unrepairable flat, you can discard the bad one and still rotate the remaining 4 tires until they are worn down.
Just don't get 2 unrepairable flats!
I didn't know about putting the spare on the rear...but I do have MT. I'll have to check, but I believe you should have the same manual I do, so perhaps that is just for the AT. . I did recently speak to SOA about what distance we are able to drive on the small spare tire. In the process of conversation, they did say it was better for the car that I had the MT, but they didn't say anything about putting it on the rear.
It is really helpful that everyone posts these comments here, so we can pick up on things that we may not have realized.
This is just what I wanted!!! Love it!
Thanks for your research!
Sgloon
Unused spares are tricky because they will always have the same, fixed circumference while the tires on the ground will wear, as pointed out above.
That's probably why they suggest keeping speeds down, and limit the distance driven as well.
I once got a flat in DE half way home from the beach, so I was 90 minutes from home in either direction. I was happy the Forester had a full size spare. I had new tires on the car, but it was a manual so no FWD fuse. The viscous coupling was able to absord whatever difference in circumference there was, because the Subie ran fine for years after.
The rear seat recline button had fallen out all together the first time I pushed it in my 2.5X premium. The dealer put it back in, and I haven't noticed a problem since. OTOH, I haven't used it but a few times...so perhaps someone who uses it more should chime in...
I know Erin (from Edmunds) is over there now as part of this group, so I expect her write-up to appear shortly on Edmunds.
What I found interesting in the MT report is the statement that there is currently no Subaru automatic that can handle the torque of this diesel, which is actually more than what the (automatic) Tribeca puts out. I think, if Subaru brings this over here, they have to offer an automatic of some sort, as well a s the 6-speed. Not having an automatic for the US-market spells disaster, I think.
I frankly hope it will come with a "beefy" CVT.
Bob
I chuckled a bit when I read "decline", though. I'm sure you meant recline.
Decline would be a button that says "No, you can't sit here, you are declined".
Hope you can get it fixed.
258 lb-ft of torque at just 1800 rpm - mama-mia! 6 speed manual?
They made a mistake comparing the euro tow ratings with ours, we all know it'll be different in the litigous USA.
0-to-62-mph (they test to 100kph) time of 10.4 seconds, but 60mph would be a few tics sooner, so figure right around 10 seconds, which matches the base engine/automatic. I think the gas/manual is quicker, though.
$2800 extra is a bit steep, plus diesel costs more than regular gas.
How do the euro MPG numbers compare to the euro gas Forester? :confuse:
EPA for the gas 2.5l is 20/27 for the manual. They estimate the combined at 22mpg, a lot closer to the city number. Let's use that number, and we'll call the diesel 36mpg. Note that I think these diesel numbers are optimistic, and I think the real-world advantage won't be that big. But let's proceed.
Ok, time for some math. Let's calculate the break-even point. We have to make assumptions, so feel free to adjust the numbers to gas/diesel prices in your area, which can and do vary.
This morning the Shell station closest to me had regular for $3.69 and diesel for $4.39. A quick search on gasbuddy for my zip says I can save about 20 cents on each if I'm willing to drive farther, but that wouldn't have a big effect anyway.
Let's do cost per 1000 miles.
Gas: 1000 miles / 22 mpg = 45.45 gallons, at $3.69 is $167.73.
Diesel: 1000 miles / 36 mpg = 27.78 gallons, at $4.39 is $121.94.
Pretty significant savings of $45.79 every 1000 miles, or every month or so.
To recover the $2800, if that's how much extra it costs, would take you $2800 / $45.79 = 61 months, or 61,149 miles.
So break even point is about 5 years for most folks.
Let's hope those EPA estimates really are that high, 35/40mpg. I keep my cars for a long time, so I would come out ahead.
Other pros? More range. 600 miles per tank sounds GREAT.
Cons? Diesel availability. Fewer stations have it, though you would have to go less often. Plus when heating oil demand goes up in winter diesel prices tend to rise, so the costs could increase.
Still, it's nice to see the diesel is financially sound.
As to $2800 for the option? Sounds about right to me. Remember, it's turbo, and you have pay for all that extra hardware. The premium cost is about what you pay for a turbo gas model.
Bob
Break even in 5 years, not bad.
It would be a good city/tow vehicle for me. Question is do we need 2 Foresters?
Plus I like true convertibles. Gimme a B9 Scrambler with a diesel.
But not at the same rpm........1800 rpm versus about 3600-4200 rpm , I believe. Without studying the gear train in the transmission, one can't tell whether that is the problem, but it probably is. At 1800 rpm the gas engine may have no more than 150 ft-lbs.
Maximum engine speed is no doubt greatly reduced in the diesel, requiring different gear reductions.
I really like the platinum leather interior, and the exterior colors are better too, but I don't want to be overly stressed about it getting dirty. That light carpet! That light leather steering wheel! How will they look after some time I wonder?
We have terrible weather here - and all winter long everything is dirty dirty dirty. Salt, mud, yukky brown slush and snow...
I'd sure appreciate it if you could share your experiences with this light interior.
As long as you're careful, particularly with dirt/mud, the light interior will last well, and remain light.
What you'll need to to beware of inside the Forester is its hard plastics are easily scratched. Just dropping a bunch of keys on the inside door arm rest is enough to put a ding in its plastic.
However, there seem to be stress points developing in the driver's door interior plastic - white spots are appearing in the door plastic near the interior arm rest and the leftmost lower corner. Too early to say what's really happening but I will be watching 'em.
Have any Impreza owners seen this (Forester borrows heavilly from Impreza for interiors) ?
I'll probably have about 1200 miles on it by the time I can get it in, do you think that will be alright? Or am I being unecessarily obsessed with sceduled service?
Am I imagining that Subarus seem to require more break-in than other cars I have driven? :confuse: The '09 XT I have, at 4K miles, seems more responsive and is getting somewhat better mileage than when it had 40 miles on it.
I have noticed better response to throttle since 15,000 miles on my Outback 3.0R!
This may be completely wrong and probably is, but does the computer sort of build up a memory of how you drive so the car 'remembers' your driving habits and that in turn affects the way it drives?
However, it is not the oil that is a concern. I have been inside a lot of engines and seen the core sand and casting slag left over from the manufacturing process. I have cut open many "first filters", and have been amazed on the stuff in there, including metal particles. I view it as good insurance to change the oil and filter early, it does no harm yet can be very good. If a filter plugs too much the bypass opens and there is no filtration at all. I personally don't want the filings and stuff that I have seen to circulate inside my engine as it breaks in, and that process alone can cause metal flakes and filings.
Most people don't do it and have no problems, but to me it is cheap insurance.
With our 5 Foresters I have found that between 10K and 20K is where the engine gets most responsive. Regarding synthetic oil, the only break-in of concern is the mating of the rings to the cylinder walls, which I have found to be somewhere between 5K and 7K. I have used Mobil 1 in all our Foresters, some getting it at 5K, some later, but all have worked out fine. When you get to the point where you aren't using any noticeable amount of oil then you should be fine with synthetic.
Len
I thought I had decided on a turbo limited Forester. But now I'm looking at the price and I'm thinking, gee, maybe I should look at the Lexus IS 250 in AWD -- it's "only" a few thousand more...and I sorta really want a car not an SUV, and it has better colors and a nicer interior...and...
Groan. I'm making myself crazy.
Maybe what you're asking is does the Forester drive like a car, and I would have to say yes, in fact the driving experience, to me, is better than many cars The AWD is fabulous. The Forester's clearance from road to vehicle is more than most cars so going over speed bumps and other road problems seem smoother and easier. Yet, like a well designed small sedan, it still has a tight turning space, much tighter than my mother's Camry, which seems like a boat these days. I like being higher up than in a car so that I can see around.
If you want the plushness and still get a Forester, you will definitely need to get a Limited. I am not completely sure if you need a turbo to get a similar experience to a car. Limiteds are in demand so be prepared to wait.
But it's kind of hard to compare a luxury sedan to an AWD crossover SUV that's more about practicality and safety.
If our new one does the same we'll be thrilled, because our mileage is already better than that '98, even with 10 more HP and an automatic.
Think of it this way - you're comparing the best Forester with the worst Lexus.
Audi hosted a driving event as Summit Point raceway and brought that Lexus, a Benz 300 4Matic, a 328xi, and an A4 V6 for us to drive and compare, and the crowd was nearly unanimous in calling the Lexus the worst-handling of the group.
It's too soft for a sports sedan, and not really roomy enough to be a good luxury sedan. In fact I'd recommend the ES350 instead, if you want isolation and comfort.
I did find the Lexus' interior to be fantastic - the softest, plushest leather seats. But it's too cramped inside to say it's truly comfortable. The Forester has got to be twice as big inside, or at least it feels that way.
The materials and workmanship on the IS are superb, even at that entry level. I'm sure if you sit in the interior, and you're not very tall, you might just fall in love.
Still, 185 lb-ft of torque? For $35 grand? That may be the worst cost per foot-pound in the whole industry.
Not enough substance for me. You buy a badge and some great leather.
The Forester has great perforated leather of its own, a lot more interior and cargo space, more HP, a lot more torque, and generally a ton more utiliity, for about $5 grand less.
In that AWD luxury sedan class, I think I'd compare the A4 2.0FSI, the BMW, and a G35x, though to be honest I'd probably end up in a Legacy GT Limited.
Compared to the Forester, Outback has a nicer interior finish, better sound system, is quieter, has a little more maximum horsepower, a more complex AWD with limited slip rear diff, SI drive, and a few more bells and whistles.
However, Outback XT's boost kicks in higher up in rev range, the drivetrain has more lash, it leans more in turns, its engine burns more fuel, there's almost no rear seat foot room, and some small bumps are harsher than in the Forester.
The Legacy sedan is pretty much like the Outback but with less interior room and drawbacks/advantages of Sedan design.
One cavet to the Outback/Legacy; they can be tempermental in emergency handling (The Legacys' video at Consumer Union shows a tail swingout). The '09 Forester does not have that problem.
The Tribeca is a nice small SUV but is also pretty cramped inside.
At this point you might want to revisit the whole car / CUV question. If you don't need AWD, or to haul anything, and can live with limited access a trunk will offer, there are any number of cars that get better mileage and are plusher than the Forester (Chevy Malibu and Toyota Camry are two that come to mind)
I live in Rochester NY and I really want AWD (we have the worst weather!). Tribeca is just too SUVish for me. I've driven the Outback and felt like it was sort of a boat - not much fun to drive.
My husband has the turbo Legacy. It is definitely fun to drive, but it is a manual and I wouldn't be happy driving that everyday. It is also really tight in the backseat, and as we have two large kids (19 and 21 yrs old) who do still occasionally go places with us (providing food is involved LOL) I'd like to be able to all get in the car.
I'll sleep on it a little more.
Thanks again!!!
Washington state does use salt, though
Colorado has gone to mag-chloride in recent years. Since then, rust has been showing up on our cars. Before that, it was non-existant. I hope they start to use something else, as that mag-chloride is also not very good for the land.
Somehow, the state/gov't agencies think they have to keep the roads dry and clear no matter how cold/snowy, so they keep finding some chemical that will thaw the snow at lower and lower temps...ah!!! Slowing down is obviously not considered as an option.
The rear seat room in the Forester is much better than the IS 250 - no contest there.
Especially with that big moonroof, I bet they prefer the Forester. It has more room and with all that glass will make the Lexus feel claustrophobic in comparison.