Subaru Crew: Suggestions for Subaru

1323335373847

Comments

  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    Frank- I think you need to spend some time in a CRV. It's vastly more roomy than the Forester. I'm certainly not alone on this. Virtually ever person who has cross-shopped the CRV and Forester, and who has selected the CRV, has done so because of the extra room that the CRV has.

    Colin- The space I'm commenting is front-to-rear, not top-to-bottom. The Forester has plenty of headroom.

    Bob
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    no need for the smart-[non-permissible content removed] remarks. What I buy for my kids is none of your damn business, and I don't appreciate those comments.

    Bob
  • locke2clocke2c Member Posts: 5,038
    whew! geez, didn't mean to touch a nerve. I've removed my comment.

    edit: I was going to send an apology via email too, but your email isn't public.

    so here goes, I'm sorry. I believed it was light-hearted teasing, and you really took offense. please accept my apologies.

    ~Colin
  • mnfmnf Member Posts: 405
    I was a long time Honda owner(3 since 1990) and just sold my 2000 Accord that was my baby. I had test drove both a Forester and CRV and liked them both very much . I live in a area that gets around 50+ inches of snow and I take my kids 12&14 snow boarding / Skiing. My concern was not the back seat if it were i may have thought different but my wifes car is a 2000 lexus rx300 so we use that if needed. I guess it was the over all package of the AWD system, options available, visibility, sporty and quickness. Again it was a tough because i love Hondas always have. The only thing that really turned me off was the shifter on the dash what happened did they run out of room. Again both great choices it's like how do you like your meat cooked Rare or well done we are all different... Matt
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    If there's one thing that really pushes my buttons, it has to do with criticism of decisions my wife and I make regarding our kids and their wellbeing, be it cars or whatever.

    As I've said before, the CRV was not my first vehicle of choice. My daughter and wife wanted it, and I support them and their decision. In any event, now that we have it, I'm in a somewhat unique position in that I'm able to make some very direct comparisons between it and our other vehicles: our Forester, Explorer and Impreza Outback, which is what I've been trying to do.

    Bob
  • locke2clocke2c Member Posts: 5,038
    I understand perfectly; everyone has hot issues.

    I didn't mean it as criticism as I said it was just poorly chosen humor.

    ~c
  • p0926p0926 Member Posts: 4,423
    You're right I need to sit in a CRV for comparison purposes but I'm still satisfied with the size of the Forester. The CRV is 4" taller, 2" wider and 3.5" longer so of course it's going to be bigger inside and for the same reason won't handle as well. Still, the Forester has more head room and front leg room (which are important to me) and has only 1.5 cu ft less cargo space (32 vs 33.5).

    -Frank P
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    Agreed. Nobody has complained about the front seat/leg room of the Forester. Complaints only arise from the "B" pillar aft.

    Again, I don't want to lose anything that has made the Forester so much fun to drive, and so popular here. I just want to see Subaru address a long-standing complaint, that just won't die.

    Bob
  • locke2clocke2c Member Posts: 5,038
    I'd certainly like to see more rear seat legroom in all models. I know that BMW has gone far with essentially worst-in-class rear seat legroom, but I don't think Subaru can follow suit.

    I think one way to do this is extending the rear glass, allowing the rear seatback to be further back at the cost of a little trunk volume, but then you have to change the trunk lid so that you can get a sufficiently wide front-rear opening.

    I'm sure their brilliant engineers can figure something out. :)

    ~c
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    CR-V's rear seat can slide fore and aft. All the way back, the leg room is just limo like. It's a feature Honda owners love.

    In that position, the cargo area is a bit short, but it is very tall. That forces you to stack the items. Our stroller would not fit in longitudinally, so we had to lay it out transversely. That meant anything else at all would have to be stacked.

    The child seats would be anchored so sliding the seat forward would not be convenient. Plus the cargo cover would not cover the entire cargo area.

    The Forester has more useable cargo space, IMO. So there are some trade-offs.

    In general I think Honda offers large-ish cars in each segment. That plus a hump-free rear passenger floor makes them quite roomy. CR-V is one of the biggest small SUVs, Pilot is among the bigger mid-size ones. Neither is very sporting, but people buy them up at rates that show maybe Honda chose the right strategy.

    In fact they will bring over the Honda Fit 5 door to slot beneath the CR-V. It's almost RAV4 sized.

    So, Subaru has the full-time AWD, sportier handling, lower center of gravity, but to stay ahead, if Honda puts SH-AWD on the Pilot and CR-V, what can Subaru do?

    I think that's where Bob's comments apply. They have to counter with more space.

    I'm hoping the 7 seater is pretty big, at least MDX sized. Then the next Forester can grow a bit and still not overlap. And the next Impreza wagon could get a boxed off rear end and take over the Forester's size niche.

    -juice
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Let me translate that long post into a couple of suggestions:

    * reduce the size of those humps! They are huge in the Forester and even the new Legacy/Outback. They rob leg room for the middle rear passenger completely.

    * raise the front seats so there it toe space below the seats for rear passengers. The 2005 models killed what little space there was before. My Forester has a decent amount, at least.

    Combine those two with a 2" longer wheelbase and noone will complain about rear leg room any more.

    Voila.

    -juice
  • p0926p0926 Member Posts: 4,423
    * reduce the size of those humps! They are huge in the Forester and even the new Legacy/Outback. They rob leg room for the middle rear passenger completely

    The easiest way to do that would be to raise the chassis or lower the transmission. The former would also raise the CG and diminish the handling while the later would reduce off-road ability.

    * raise the front seats so there it toe space below the seats for rear passengers. The 2005 models killed what little space there was before. My Forester has a decent amount, at least.

    Did they change something for 05? I'm pretty sure the 03 & 04 model-year Foresters did gain a small amount foot well space.

    Know what else the Forester has over the CRV? Best in class safety ratings! And cheaper repair costs. Regardless of utility, I don't think I could ever consider the CRV because it has no real bumpers to speak of. Add in the fact that it has a rear-mounted spare and the slightest tap from behind by a larger vehicle and you're replacing the whole back end!

    Don’t get me wrong, the CRV is a good vehicle but it’s far from perfect. And really, do we want Subaru to try and compete head-to-head with Honda? IIRC they tried that once before with near disastrous results.

    -Frank P
  • volkovvolkov Member Posts: 1,306
    And that rear door swings the wrong #&*%ing way. If loading from the curb you have to go around it. Not convenient when the guy behind has parked within 3'. I'm sure it comes from RHD in japan, but how hard would it be to switch a door hinge for the NA Market?
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    There is room for Subaru's hump to shrink, look under the vehicle. The exhaust is 1.75" diameter, you don't need a hump that huge just for that and a smallish driveshaft.

    Forester is OK with foot room under the seat, it's the Legacy that blocks it completely with a bar. Even if you raise the seat all the way, there is zero toe space.

    My wife liked the CR-V also, and an uneducated buyers that walks up to both might not know about the safety ratings, the hatch that opens only to block the curb side, and the lack of a real rear bumper.

    The average consumer doesn't realize those things until after the purchase. But they see the roomy rear seat right away.

    -juice
  • njswamplandsnjswamplands Member Posts: 1,760
    >>>
    Forester is OK with foot room under the seat, it's the Legacy that blocks it completely with a bar
    <<<

    so you hoping subaru will raise the bar in the near luxury market?
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    There ya go, RAISE THE BAR! LOL

    -juice
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    And cheaper repair costs. Regardless of utility, I don't think I could ever consider the CRV because it has no real bumpers to speak of. Add in the fact that it has a rear-mounted spare and the slightest tap from behind by a larger vehicle and you're replacing the whole back end!

    That was one of my many arguments that fell on deaf ears with wife and daughter. That and the superior AWD, yadda, yadda. One can only say so much...

    As I said before, I was really hoping for another Subaru of some sort, new or used. It certainly would have been less expensive. Hopefully the CRV's excellent resale value we will benefit from some day.

    Bob
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    You tend to run your fleet into the ground, so longevity is more important than resale.

    One Honda owner has his daughter back in to a pole and it did $1500 in damage. Not worth making a claim so it came out of her pocket.

    Just be careful backing down that driveway in the dark, in fact I'd consider doing a 3 point turn to go down facing forward. I'm sure she'll adapt to driving it, it's not like the Prelude had great visibility.

    -juice
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    You're geezin' Bob! ;-)

    If Honda ever offers GPS maybe they could add a rear view camera like on the Infiniti FX. SUVs with limited rear visibility could benefit from that.

    I don't think any current Subie is bad enough to need that, but we'll see about the 7 seater. Longer cars are harder to back up.

    CR had good results with those convex stick-on thingies that skew the view downward. One CR-V owner has one, FWIW.

    -juice
  • salbaby1972salbaby1972 Member Posts: 165
    For a good amount of money, you can get an after market on installed. The screen on the rear view mirror.

    http://www.alandeds.com/

    -> Navigation
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Here's a good one, in Australia there is a rain deflector for the 2005 models' front doors. Owners are already complaining that they open the door and in some situations a cup's worth of water pours in to the interior.

    Australia has this option already, perhaps SoA should consider offering it here.

    It's part no E3610AG010 and costs A$266.65 there.

    And be quick about it, you might lose a few customers already.

    -juice
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    http://www.freep.com/money/autonews/smart10e_20040610.htm

    Would love to see Subaru offer something here that looked like the R1e (Maybe a R1h hybrid?) to go toe-to-toe with the SMART.

    Bob
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Wouldn't be bad timing with current gas prices. Course by the time it was ready I'm sure prices would plunge.

    -juice
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    I've complained in the past that our '01 Forester S Premium, when the moonroof is open is very noisy. Well, I just drove a new Legacy GT Limited wagon, and tested its' equally-large moonroof when open&#151;and it is much quieter. I guess it has to do with that large pop-up front section. Whatever the reason, Subaru should incorporate the "solution" into future Forester moonroofs.

    Bob
  • subearusubearu Member Posts: 3,613
    FWIW, the aftermarket one in my F-XT is fairly quiet as well. I imagine the overall size of the opening is probably some of the issue as well - the OEM is much larger opening than the aftermarket one I have. Plus, mine has a built in pop-up deflector (as does our OEM one on our MPV). Not sure if the Subie OEM on the Forester has that.

    -Brian
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    Not sure if the Subie OEM on the Forester has that.

    It has a very small metal pop-up deflector, and it doesn't do the job. I think it need something the size of the one found on new Legacy/Outback wagons.

    I think you're right about the size of the moonroof, in terms of noise. It seems the smaller the moonroof, the quieter. The small moonroofs on our new CRV and my '98 Explorer are very quiet.

    Bob
  • subearusubearu Member Posts: 3,613
    I wonder if those with the moonroof deflector thing (that acrylic piece that attaches before the roof) have any wind noise issues with the large OEM roof.

    -Brian
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Perhaps they can spend extra time in the wind tunnel with the 2008 models, to test it.

    -juice
  • pon1pon1 Member Posts: 196
    New base engine in OB - about 200 hp and 200 ft/lbs via non turbo H4 with VVT or detuned H6, running on regular gas. Uses MT and 5EAT from the 2005 GT/OB XT/H6.

    A "ruggedised" trim level in the OB and/or Forester, so that dogs, kids and gardening supplies do not wreck the interior. Maybe with unpainted cladding.

    More intereting colors and no more 2-tone.

    JP
  • dcm61dcm61 Member Posts: 1,567
    I second the motion. :-)

    DaveM
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    I third the motion, and add in Ed's suggestion of offering a GMC XUV/Studebaker Wagonaire-like rear sliding roof to the "ruggedised" Forester/Outback.

    Bob
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    I'm sure Subaru's response will be, 'that's what the Baja is for.'

    Maybe the Baja could evolve into such a vehicle?

    Bob
  • hypovhypov Member Posts: 3,068
    probably get a rebadged GMC XUV :P

    -Dave
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Please, no badge engineering.

    Subaru's Number One strength is their identity, AWD wagons with boxer engines. You put one GM re-badge and it can spoil their entire image.

    -juice
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    Ditto that! No badge-engineering, please!

    Bob
  • dcm61dcm61 Member Posts: 1,567
    Subaru's Number One strength is their identity, AWD wagons with boxer engines.

    So a re-badged Porsche 911 C4 wagon would be OK? :-)

    DaveM
  • njswamplandsnjswamplands Member Posts: 1,760
    So a re-badged Porsche 911 C4 wagon would be OK? :-)

    yeah baby
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    There are always rare exceptions. ;-)

    -juice
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    Subaru's Number One strength is their identity, AWD wagons with boxer engines. You put one GM re-badge and it can spoil their entire image.

    -juice


    AWD is their only "image" really in the general public. 95% of the people out there don't know a boxer from a V engine.

    -mike
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    New base engine in OB - about 200 hp and 200 ft/lbs via non turbo H4 with VVT or detuned H6, running on regular gas.

    I too would like to see the base engine upgraded with a non-turbo variant of the DOHC 2.5 AVCS H-4, and running on regular gas. I do think for this engine, tuning it to run on regular gas is absolutely vital.

    Not so sure if the 200/200 would be achievable if it runs on regular, however. Also 200/200 is very close to the low-boost turbo 210 hp found on the Forester XT/Baja turbo; too close IMO. I think this base engine should be tuned closer to 185/185, or 190/190 at most.

    Bob
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    Here the '05s are just hitting the lots, and we're already talking about '06 upgrades...

    Anyway, here's what I would like to see:

    &#149; The above mentioned base engine.
    &#149; 5EAT to replace all 4EATs
    &#149; Limited models to be replaced by "n" models with a basic (meaning as inexpensive as possible) NAV system.
    &#149; Base GTs and XTs to come with standard moonroof.
    &#149; Front center armrest extension to be standard across the board.
    &#149; Auto-up feature on driver's window.
    &#149; 60-second (or more) time delay on power accessories after engine is shut down.
    &#149; Redesigned (horizontal, not vertical) interior door pulls that don't interfere with the power window switch operation.
    &#149; Toe room under front seats for rear passengers.
    &#149; Self-leveling rear suspension on all wagons.
    &#149; Combine the Outback VDC & LL Bean onto one model, and spread the VDC feature to more models.
    &#149; Offer a vehicle similar to the Legacy H-6 Spec-B recently shown/promised for Europe, with the STi's 6-speed.

    Bob
  • hypovhypov Member Posts: 3,068
    No no no no, no standard moonroof. There are still people out there who do not like a hole in their roof, and I'm one of them.

    -Dave
  • ladywclassladywclass Member Posts: 1,713
    (Dave said it so well!)
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    Then at least make it an option for those who do want it.

    Bob
  • p0926p0926 Member Posts: 4,423
    I agree that it should be an option across the board. Especially since you can't come even close to getting an aftermarket equivalent.

    -Frank
  • frogfrog Member Posts: 52
    I will chime in from the sidelines.... new 2004 leg wagon owner

    I liked sitting in the Forester, but it seemed too narrow. I think it could use a wider track, still trying to keep it small and nimble. Also some lower suspension packages..... it looks too tall to my eye.

    The 04 leg needs a telescoping wheel and a longer track to pull seat back more as in the 05. It is fatigueing to have to hold your arms out straight to drive, and unsafe to travel with two fingers on the bottom of the wheel. I am comfortable enough but my feet are cramped a bit. Also, the seats could use the volvo touch. They are well formed but feel a little too sporty and small for a daily family driver. You can't really move around. I think the new leg/ob should get a bit wider inside, with more luxurious seating. I don't think these cars are designed for flogging in corners, so width and plushness are more important than bolsters. People can always get recaro aftermarket seats if they are needed. Memory seats would be nice. Finally, my engine of choice would be a boxer 6 with a six speed. Make the gearing tall and keep the 6th speed as a dedicated overdrive. I think it would outlast and be smoother than a turbo 4. Also it could be designed to run on 87 octane. Thanks, F.
  • pon1pon1 Member Posts: 196
    Forester XT is underated (240hp??). So provided they underate the "new base engine", 185-190 will be fine. The need for premium kills sales, even if the reality is that incremental costs of premium are very minor.

    JP
  • rangnerrangner Member Posts: 336
    In addition to all the other improvements that bob has mentioned on the Baja, make a regular cab version with a long bed and a boxer turbo diesel option. Basically more pickup utility.

    I read over on a diesel website that Subaru will be making a 2.0 liter boxer diesel engine to supply Suzuki and Fiat worldwide. Bring it here Subaru!! America is starting to warm up to diesels. And with the low sulfur diesel coming in 2006, the small diesel vehicle market will be booming.

    Eric
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    Or as they're called in Australia, "Utes."

    These kinds of vehicles are quite popular down there, and elsewhere in the world. In this day and age of high fuel prices&#151;and the fact that Detroit just keeps building larger and larger pickups&#151;would mean that there' should be a good market for the "right kind" of small car-based pickup, I would think.

    Bob
  • p0926p0926 Member Posts: 4,423
    and the fact that Detroit just keeps building larger and larger pickups

    Not just Detroit any more. Both Toyota and Nissan have jumped on the bigger is better bandwagon ;-(

    -Frank
This discussion has been closed.

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.