Subaru XT Turbo Forester

kullenberg · December 2003

Jack and Juice: Thanks for your comments. I haven't been following this forum too closely, lately, so I'm not aware of whatever flame wars have been going on. Jack, your comments and answers have always been succinct and to the point, and for that I thank you. I'm fortunate, in that I have a very good relationship with the sales mgr. at my local dealer ( he says I've raped him twice already, so the 3rd time won't be so painful). He says I can take an XT on an overnite test drive, to include our mtn. My memory of the brief sit I had in a Forester, was that it was reasonably comfortable; plenty of leg room and head room, and not too difficult to get into and out of. I think I will take him up on his offer after the first of the year. I drove a Jeep GC Overland today, and was under whelmed. Steering was vague, requiring constant correction. The seats were too soft, and lacked back support. Overall, not a solution.
Cheers
Pat

ballistic · December 2003

JB: you often mention road/tire noise,

To be fair, this is one of the more widely-echoed XT criticisms. In other words, on this count (even if on no others), it's not only JB.

I don't tend to group the Forester with SUVs. While it shares some of their characteristics, I think of it as a car with a tallish body.

In any event, I balance the noise levels (to some extent) against other qualities that I value, one of which is light weight. Other things being equal, it is more difficult to provide a quiet interior in a lightweight vehicle than in a heavy one. However, as others have said before, if Subaru is as serious about moving up-market as they say, interior noise levels must come down.

ballistic · December 2003

I do know what you mean about the angle. I'd probably raise the front seat track...the seats themselves are great.

I'll eventually get around to shimming the front of the seat. I'm coming around to agreeing that the seat itself, in all other respects, is quite good. If only the $*&@! seatbelt would hold the hips snugly in place - but that's a complaint that applies to every contemporary car. I do not want the lap portion to decide how tight (or loose) it should be. Leave that to me.

ballistic · December 2003

Negatives:
- needs longer wheelbase. Keep the same size, but increase wheelbase.
- suspension - i personally think it does not take bumps well (think highway expansion joints), and at the same time feels too soft in handling. Check a Lexus IS300, or even a Honda, to see how it should be done.
- too small for the price, at least here in the US...

This is a prime example of how one person's steak is another's gristle. I have repeatedly complimented the Forester's ride, and one of the things I like best is how well they were able to accomplish that with the short (or, put another way, just-barely-long-enough) wheelbase. If you lengthen the wheelbase, then (for any given maximum steering angle) the turning circle gets larger, and the Forester becomes slightly less maneuverable in tight quarters. Would backseat space and ride quality improve with a lengthened wheelbase? Very likely. Would another attribute (one that I value) be diminished? Also likely.

As with many other characteristics, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. It's not a question of right or wrong, it's a question of differing priorities.

I don't correlate size with price at all. An excellent small car is worth far more to me than a merely average large one.

once_for_all · December 2003

Yokohama Geolander get dissed as above. While there are better tires in specific traits (handling, snow traction, etc.) I am quite please at the all around performance.

It is kind of like a Forester discussion--- all around a fantastic vehicle, but some of the specifics maybe not as good as another car. Pick what you like the most and go for it. But don't tear down a nice package because it isn't the ulitimate in all categories.

John

stever · December 2003

For a few minutes there I thought I was reading I Don't Like SUVs. There seems to be some holiday stress in the air.

If you're going to post or lurk in here, you are welcome to scroll past any messages you don't wish to read. Anyone is welcome to respond to anything posted here however.

More eggnog anyone?

Steve, Host

p0926 · December 2003

ateixeira · December 2003

I think of it as a car with a tallish body

OK, then let's just let people know you're holding it to a higher standard than the louder CR-V, RAV4, Escape, etc.

I don't think the Forester moved upmarket ... yet. Street prices are actually lower than they were for my 1998! Now that is amazing, and part of my value equation.

get around to shimming the front

Get to it! ;-)

It was easy in the Miata because the seat track is straight and level. The Forester's seat track tilts down at the front. Check it out, though.

I think the Geolanders are a good All Terrain tire, let's just recognize what they are meant for - slightly tougher duties than a road tire. Gravel trails, stuff like that.

If you want quiet, a good touring tire would be better.

-juice

ballistic · December 2003

reasonably comfortable; plenty of leg room and head room, and not too difficult to get into and out of.

Longer exposure will reinforce those impressions.

I drove a Jeep GC Overland today, and was under whelmed. Steering was vague, requiring constant correction.

I'm a fanatic about steering and road feel through the wheel, which is why I think the Forester's is boosted quite a bit more than even little old ladies would require. Not a lot of feel makes it through the assist. That leads me to wonder how a Forester driver can know what the front wheels are doing on snow or ice - the very conditions that otherwise best suit the car.

Notwithstanding that, the steering is very precise and delightfully responsive. On balance, steering goes into the plus column.

ballistic · December 2003

I am quite please at the all around performance.

Other than noise transmission, which is my sole nit, I agree.

I've heard of some folk getting 50,000 miles out of them. The way I drive, they'll probably last forever.

corkfish · December 2003

I'm not crazy about 1st gear, but the 444 axle ratio doesn't bother me at all. I know mileage is a sacrifice, but I saw the MPG sticker on the window when I bought it. The axle is fine, the transmission gearing could be improved. My Sentra revs at 3500 RPMs at 70 mph so this seems much less buzzy to me. The handling is not great and can feel a little tippy if you go around corners to fast, but I bought it for straight line performance ( after all, how many people push a car to its handling limits?). Interior is ok, but keep in mind, this is a $24,000 car ( which won't buy much these days). Yeah, the climate control is odd and oil seems to give a different reading every time I look, but I don't regret buying it. It won't handle like the WRX, but the lag in the WRX was so awful I got out of it and said "this car does 0 to 60 in less than 6 seconds?" It sure didn't feel like it. The XT does though. Perhaps it's a bad comparison, but it reminds me a lot of the Buick Gran National.

atlgaxt · December 2003

This is off topic, but I had the same experience driving my friend's Jeep GC. Sucker was wandering all over the road needing constant correction, especially because of a strong head wind. I saw a discussion of this once in a magazine. Jeep says they do this on purpose so the wheel won't jerk out of your hand if you hit an obstacle off roading. So the vehicle drives like doo doo 99% of the time for the sake of the 1% of people who actually take it rock climbing.

We are much better driving Subaru "soft roaders" that can handle as much off roading (forest service trails, etc.) as most people need without compromising the vehicle in daily driving. Did I sufficiently get back on topic?

darbow · December 2003

Just wanted to add my 3 cents after i have test driven the XT 5sp 3 times and only test drove the VUE v6 Auto just once, i like the payment of the VUE better ($50 less a month) and the SUNROOF (Subaru are you reading this) and the 17 inch wheels. I just dont like the floaty feel of the suspension (feels like a Buick) and vague steering feel. But the power of the V6 up around highway speeds was quick (downshifting at 75 shot up to 95 in heartbeat). Anyone else check out the new Hondaurn Vue??? watta think?

michaellno · December 2003

...been reading the last couple of dozen posts, and thought I'd jump in with my .02.

The way I see it is that the Forester is a "car-on-stilts". Other vehicles that I would categorize in the same way:

--> Mitsubishi Outlander
--> Subaru Outback
--> Audi allroad

Te wife and I will cross-shop it against the small "cute-utes" that are available (CRV, VUE, Escape/Tribute, RAV4). Each person has their own list of what's important and what's irrelevant about the vehicle they are looking for. No sense arguing about them here -- we'll never convince someone else that our list of pros and cons are the only ones that matter.

These are forums that promote the exchange of ideas using a friendly, non-threatening medium. Disagreements are part and parcel of this kind of discussion -- without them, all we would hear is the sound of us patting each other on the back regarding the wonderful choice in vehicle we made!

The comments (both pro and con) are very helpful to someone like me. When the time comes for the test drive, I'll keep in mind the things that I've read on this board, and mention them to the wife as well. Each car we buy is a study in compromise -- we can't get (read: afford) everything we want in a car, so we have to make decisions and settle in certain areas. For example:

low ground clearance - tough to get through big snow drifts, poorer visibility (seeing over traffic)
high ground clearance - probably more weight, less mpg, less maneuverable

Each buyer will have to evaluate what is important to them (and spouse, and family) and decide accordingly.

Happy Holidays to all!

ballistic · December 2003

These are forums that promote the exchange of ideas using a friendly, non-threatening medium.

Or should be.

tidester · December 2003

Or should be.

It will be! :-)

tidester, host

ugly1 · December 2003

I check this forum on almost a daily basis but did a month just go by? Most of you must have the whole week off. Have a good one.

ballistic · December 2003

I think "greatness" is a pretty high standard at this price point.

A car's price point (or value equation) plays prominently in my definition of 'greatness'. A Rolls is undoubtedly a very satisfying car for some people, but grotesquely overpriced IMO. Considering the value equation as I apply it, a Rolls is nowhere near true greatness, because I don't think there's much of a trick to building a superb vehicle when cost is no object. The challenge is to build a great car on a budget. Ergo, an XT is closer than a Rolls to greatness on my scale.

However, the XT's price point has almost nothing to do with several of what I regard to be its most pronounced shortcomings. For example, it would have cost Subaru literally nothing, in terms of dollars, to specify 3.9 final drives instead of 4.44. By choosing the latter, they emphasized (I would say over-emphasized) one set of attributes to the detriment of others. Some buyers are thrilled with the result; I'm less so. Another example: They're already shipping XTs with 5MT/sunroof/leather to Canada. It would have cost essentially nothing to simply make the exact same combinations available here, just as there. The bi-level heat-low,cool-high heater mode I need is not at all uncommon on cars much lower priced than the XT. White-on-black instruments that quite a few people have said are difficult to read on sunny days don't cost an iota less than black-on-white dials.

It is these kinds of omissions and design decisions that neither added nor subtracted from the cost to build the cars that cause the XT to miss my standard of true greatness. Correcting them would have had zero effect on the price point at which the car sells.

paisan · December 2003

Whiteface guages are bling.

Gear ratio? I think it's great cause you shouldn't be doing like 150mph in a Forester on the public roads, and everyone reads the stupid magazines that say "0-60 times are XYZ" so Subaru did the right thing in that they played to the marketing crowd, they've been not doing that for too long.

-mike

miamixt · December 2003

My Sticker was $29K. Darbow, I think you should go with the Vue, after all the payments are cheaper!

wzeiser · December 2003

Holy egg nog!! I made an entry four hours ago; three pages later, here I am with more chat than I could ever imagine--amazing and especially serendipitous since I am making my decision about the XT manual tomorrow. The dealer is offering me 24K on the dot. I'm thinking really hard.

CHEERS!

lucien2 · December 2003

Get back to work, people!! :-)

forestir · December 2003

For whoever asked about the XT vs Accord, I have a 6th gen Accord EX V6 and am in the market for an F-XT. Test drive of F-XT revealed:

- it is noisier than the Accord on the highway, probably tire noise, but also some wind noise thrown in. Accord transmits lots of tire noise (you know when you're on asphalt vs concrete)--a switch to different tires helped quite a bit.

- F-XT engine was very quiet and smooth at idle--same as Accord, but you could hear its pleasant growl when accelerating.

- ride quality was similar, no rattles except once when going over speedbump at about 6 mph at the dealership

- even the highly regarded Accord has its share of rattles: sunroof (needs to be lubed around the rubber seal every 1.5 yrs), center storage bin missing a clip and buzzes, drivers door buzzes against the dash

Also, discussion about gearing is interesting. I figure Subaru had to compromise to have low gearing for towing and for offroading (lacking low range). It happens to make it wickedly quick, but I can't imagine that they went for a 0-60 number when they decided on gearing. It's just not in their character to really care (IMHO).

Thanks for everyone sharing their thoughts. It has been useful to me. Good and bad.

Merry Xmas!

darbow · December 2003

to Miamixt, every dealer ive been too offers around 2k off the list price of $25,800ish (i want the basic hot rod, not the Lincoln versions). I also can get 3.9% financing and have a internet coupon for $500 off if i buy before 1-5-04 (got it in a email a week ago, not sure where it came from). I guess your XT was loaded and no one would deal?

Oh, to Forestir, i would love to drive the 4dr, all wheel drive, V6 or Turbo 4, 5 speed Accord if they MADE one. Thanks for the semi-comparison though (ive owned 4 Honda's before)

p0926 · December 2003

Honda not offering the V-6 Accord with a MT has always been a pet peeve of mine.

-Frank P.

rsholland · December 2003

is available with the current generation Accord coupe.

http://autos.yahoo.com/newcars/d/honda03accordcoupe/exv66speedmt/- trim_overview.html

Bob

darbow · December 2003

Umm, the Accord Coupe V6 only has the manual, all the 4 doors come w/autogirlymatics. FYI.

daniell · December 2003

"This is a prime example of how one person's steak is another's gristle."

Completely agree with you on this one.

Some people complained about rear legroom. I am 5'7", wife is 5'3". To us, rear legroom is adequate, to most might be tight at best. That's why a prospective buyer needs to hear all the opinions and decide what's important for him/her.

I do a fair amount of highway driving. So I wish the Forester had a longer wheelbase, a la BMW 3 series - a small car with a longish wheelbase (107" or so, I believe). IMO the short wheelbase makes the Forester a poor cross country vehicle (that is, unless "country" is the size of Andorra or Luxembourg). But for people who don't do much highway driving, this is probably a non-issue...

darbow · December 2003

Now that the Accord thing is over, lets talk about the 3.5 V6 5speed Altima starting at around 23k with the same engine as the 350Z and 0-60 under 6 seconds. Granted you dont get the AWD turbo but its something to compare. Even comes with a SUNROOF !!!! under 25K.

Anyone drive the Altima, how does it compare please?

paisan · December 2003

Mad Torque Steer!

What's the big beef with the ATs... I've spanked plenty of cars with the Franken L with a 4EAT

-mike

darbow · December 2003

Kinda like torque steer, reminds me i have an engine, and a strong one at that. In the Forester, i love it when the front of the car lifts up when i get on it. Now what do we call that, engine lift?

stuhall · December 2003

/direct/view/.ef0d013/2276

Happened to me in an XT. Anyone else?

paisan · December 2003

Nah, it means you need better springs and struts

Time for some AGXs and Eibach springs.

-mike

miamixt · December 2003

Darbow, yes I HAD to buy the fully loaded XT PP, bought it on Impulse, without doing lots o' research, because there was only 3 XT's available in a 100 Mile range, and I wanted Black. Aside from some initial Rattles, a buzz, and the worst experience with any New Car Dealership regarding Service, no trained, Certified, or English Speaking Mechanics available! Since then I have found a better Dealer for Service, and a GREAT Mechanic too. Is the Zero Percent Financing still available, I saw it on the Subaru Website. And about the extras with the PP Package, I could of done without them all, even though I did get to experience my Bun Warmer in this Frigid 45 degree Weather we have had here in South Florida. Nothing like an Auto Dimming Rear View Mirror that you can't see the Cops in! And where is my Cassette in my "Upgraded" Sound system, my friends O3 XS has one, sure his system sounds like Crap, yet he contends his Power Train has Plenty O' Power, I spent a few days on Vacation with him, and let me tell you, the difference with the XT is Night and Day . All I would of wanted is a single Disc System that plays Mp3's. I paid 2.5 percent over Invoice plus the "Dealer Fee". Shoot for Invoice with no "Dealer Fee", but I do highly recommend this "Wagon"! I asked this before about a new 04 Subaru V6 Engine with a whopping 212 HP. I sure wish I had that Engine instead, no way, " I Keed"!

darbow · December 2003

Oh, sorry about your poor dealer service dept, i think were spoiled in the Northeast with tech's that are great. Glad your havin fun w/XT, i hope to be an owner soon (still lookin and driving my salesperson nuts w/test drives etc.....)

samiam_68 · December 2003

FWIW, here is my summary after 4,500 miles with my 2.5 XT MT:

Pros:

- Powerful engine
- Nice seats
- Very practical
- Good visibility
- Good handling and brakes
- Great in the snow / rain
- Nice all-weather features (heated everything)
- Heater and A/C are VERY powerful and quick
- Gearing and final-drive ration are perfectly fine to me, feels just right, has nothing to do with gas mileage

Cons:
- Terrible, torturous seatbelts
- Oversensitive drive-by-wire throttle resulting in poor gas mileage
- Hood scoop further reducing highway MPG due to drag (Subaru: mount the intercooler upfront below the radiator and ditch the scoop!)
- Gauge needles impossible to read with sunglasses on
- Auto climate control is poorly designed and not very effective / useful

To those who will jump on me due to my MPG comments, take a look at some American cars with tall gearing, lugging around 2K RPM at 70 MPH - why do they get such good gas mileage? Because those engines are WEAK, not because of the gearing. An average GM 3.8L engine is rated at 200hp. That is pathetic by today's standards.
The Forester XT engine is POWERFUL, therefore it uses more gas, especially with that trigger-sharp throttle control. Power comes at the expense of gasoline usage.

Also, from real life comments on these boards, seems the A/T XT is getting lower MPG than the M/T XT despite taller gearing. I just filled up today, clocked in 23.2 MPG in 80/20 hwy/city. Not too shabby for a 5.3 second 0-60 car. Car and Driver observed 20 MPG while beating the daylights out of it. Not bad IMO.

troop2shos · December 2003

"4. Headlights. This is one I have not seen being talked about, as most seem to like them. The XT seems to have a more dramatic separation between high beam and low beam then I have experienced before. When driving in hilly areas in the country, the low is too low and the high is too high. Neither work well for me. Can that be adjusted somehow?"

Maybe I missed an answer / opinion with all the recent posts...

The headlight reflective pattern on low-beam emulates the european style cut-off pattern but maybe having more degree rise to the shoulder to illuminate road signs, etc. The cut-off should be exactly, or just slightly lower to being parallel to the road surface. Having driven with euro style lenses, you will get outstanding illumination coverage across the road but you may find at first, that the cut-off is disconcerting until you get used to it due to the very fine controlled output with little stray light rising above the horizontal cut-off (better for driving in low visibility conditions). The high beam pattern, what little I've been able to use it the past 2 weeks, does seem to throw the beam a bit to the high side. Sorry, but I haven't measured the pattern or looked for any adjustment screws yet. I believe the fogs can be adjusted which seem to be aimed slightly low - will have to measure, also.
Overall, I find the beam pattern very good in a stock non-HID set-up though I prefer quad lamps with individual adjustment capabilities.

troop2shos · December 2003

Doesn't the XT have a rated drag coefficient of .35? Not too bad for a boxy design. IMO, the hood scoop does little to affect MPG that you would notice. Besides, you want the scoop in a high pressure area to suck the air down into the intercooler which I'm sure the Subaru engineers checked for in deciding its hood mount location. Having the scoop further back towards the windshield may yield an even higher pressure area, though, as air builds-up at the base of the windshield.

ballistic · December 2003

Whiteface guages are bling.

Neither the presence nor absence of bling matters to me in the slightest; function does. Black lettering on white dials is easier to read under nearly any condition than the reverse.

Gear ratio? I think it's great cause you shouldn't be doing like 150mph in a Forester on the public roads

Agreed. A bit of self-discipline would be good. Whether or not a car can attain xxx mph is no basis for doing so on public roads.

ballistic · December 2003

I am 5'7", wife is 5'3". To us, rear legroom is adequate, to most might be tight at best.

I'm just under 6'. After setting the driver's seat as I've described (won't do it here again to avoid further upsetting the too-much-repetition folks), I have enough front-seat legroom that fully depressing the clutch is a stretch-to-tiptoe operation - and then, without changing the seat position, I can climb out and sit behind myself with at least an inch or two of kneeroom to spare. Given that, and the car's tidy size, I no longer fault the backseat space at all. And that's saying something, because we all know how ready I am to find fault with the slightest XT imperfection.

ballistic · December 2003

Gearing and final-drive ration are perfectly fine to me, feels just right,

You're happily in the majority.

has nothing to do with gas mileage

This statement cannot be proved. Axle ratios are certainly not the only factor affecting a given vehicle's fuel consumption, but without question they do indeed influence it. Shorter ratios require more RPM, friction unarguably rises with the square of increased RPM, and it takes fuel to overcome friction.

miamixt · December 2003

paisan · December 2003

FMIC on an SUV is BAD BAD BAD.

Heck FMIC on just about any car other than a race car is bad. Why? Road debris. I think Subaru is smart putting it up top no need for another item in the front to get whacked with stones, brush etc.

-mike

paisan · December 2003

IMHO whiteface or blackface doesn't much matter. I've had black face on all my cars and never have a problem seeing them. Even under race conditions.

-mike

lucien2 · December 2003

not in a million zillion years will we see that on a Forester. They'll never risk the outstanding crash test scores. That is one expensive 20 mph impact. The people who currently complain about the "boy racer" hood scoop would scream bloody murder when they get the repair bill for what should have been a minor fender bender.

njswamplands · December 2003

rsholland · December 2003

FMIC = ?

Bob

hypov · December 2003

Front Mounted InterCooler

-Dave

rsholland · December 2003

but wasn't sure. Thanks.

Bob

lbhaley · December 2003

I take one day off and return to find over 100 new posts on this forum. It must be a slow week at work for everyone (I know it is here). I would like to add my thoughts on the XT. Like Jack I ordered my XT sight unseen and without a test drive or even a real review from any of the major car magazines. I have never done this before. I owned a 98 Forester S which I loved. The only thing it needed IMO was more power. When I heard the turbo was coming I knew I had to have one. I got the first XT that my dealership sold. When it arrived, driven from another dealer, the sales people were all over it. I had a hard time getting close enough to see what the interior looked like, and it was my car! I paid $24K even for it with a cargo tray as the only extra. To say that I am happy with my purchase would be an understatement. This car has exceeded my expectations in almost every way, especially in the areas of acceleration and refinement. I never expected it to be this fast and the refinement is noticeably better than my 98. My only disappointment is with the automatic climate control. I was hoping to 'set it and forget it' but have resorted to using it in manual mode. I agree with every point that Jack makes both pro and con. The difference is that most of his cons don't bother me personally. For example I love the hill holder and use it all the time. Every con that Jack has listed could very well be an annoyance to someone. If you are shopping for an XT the best thing to do is drive one and then make your own decision. What drives one person crazy (the short gearing) might be a plus to someone else (I love it because of the acceleration it produces). XT buyers now have the luxury of test drives and a C&D road test that Jack and I (and others that bought early) did not have. I have owned over 40 vehicles in my life and so far the XT is the best overall automobile I have ever owned.

On another quick note, I installed my Blizzak WS-50 snow tires last weekend. I ordered these from Tire Rack telling them that I owned an 04 Forester X. They wouldn't sell me the steel wheel combo for the XT. They fit fine and are only slightly noisier then the Geolanders. I know they are great in the snow as I had the same package on my 98. I got the #14 wheel covers (they were out of style #15 that I wanted)and like them a lot. IMO they have a similar appearance to the XT alloys.

-Les

Subaru XT Turbo Forester

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles