The comment I made awhile ago had less to do with heel & toeing, which involves throttle and brake, than with the closeness of the throttle compared to the distance to the fully-depressed, too-long-travel clutch.
I have only two gripes about the XT: 1) idiotic seatbelts and 2) retarded climate control. Everything else is either OK (MPG, noise) or great (engine, 5MT transmission, AWD). Ballistic - I'll trade you my driver's seatbelt - it's so tight you won't be able to breathe or wiggle in it, much less slide around in your seat.
Jack writes: "Unfortunately, Subaru gives no middle-ground alternative. If the base Forester's 165HP isn't quite enough, and the XT's 240-whatever is more than you need, you're stuck. Nothing offered by anyone else fills the wide performance gap between the XS and XT any better, IMO."
Agreed?
By the way, Jack, you've described right where I am.
There are several other SUV's with around 200 HP engines. Anyone seen the STI Forester? Same drivetrain as the STI. If they keep the 444 axle ratios, it would probably be even faster than the STI sedan. They have pictures on another website.
Most of the other SUVs/crossovers in the neighborhood of 200HP weigh more (sometimes considerably more) than the Forester, so their performance suffers. And most of them are available only with slushboxes, which drags them down even more - Hyundai Santa Fe, Kia Sorento, Tribute/Escape, Highlander, RX330, Pilot, etc.
...does one really need, anyway? I mean, you can't go faster than 75MPH anywhere in the country, and I would think that most folks don't practice full-throttle acceleration from stop lights and stop signs. So what if the difference between 0-60 is .5 or 1 second?
As long as the vehicle in question has enough get up and go to merge safely onto a highway, that ought to be adequate.
Yes, the spouse is considering the FXT, VUE and Escape/Tribute for her next vehicle. Outside possibility to either the Santa Fe or Outlander. Auto show is in 6 weeks here in Denver, so we'll go and evaluate at that time.
Good question. Obviously, different people will have differing requirements. For me, the naturally-aspirated XS Forester would have been adequate for ordinary daily driving, but not for climbing mountain roads, especially with any significant passenger/gear load aboard. Also not for uphill 2-lane passing. The XT is better suited for those requirements, and also can better handle the everyday stuff at lower RPM and smaller throttle openings - in other words, it loafs most of the time, with lots of power in reserve, instead of being pushed closer to its maximums.
surprised me with its torque when climbing up 6,000 feet over a 20 mile stretch. The only times I had to downshift out of 5th was to slow down for vehicles in front. I had 2 adults, 2 kids,a dog, and full snow gear. MPG went from 27-28 down to 25 on that tank of gas.
The amazing thing about the FXT is that it's not .5 or 1 sec faster than anything in its class, it's a full 2-3 sec faster than even the V-6s. Except for the Red Line which it only beats by 1.7 sec :-)
In fact, I figure that the FXT is faster (0-60) than 99+% of the vehicles on the road today. So does anybody really need all that acceleration? Of course not but as Jack pointed out, it sure is nice to have on call when you want it :-)
If you're requirement is simply adequate acceleration, then you should be looking at the X or XS.
Good points. And, seeing as how we live at 6000' (between Denver and Colo. Springs), there won't be as much power loss due to the forced induction.
A year or two ago, the wife and I test drove an Outback with the 165-hp NA engine and an automatic transmission. Seemed quite underpowered to both of us. Since the Forester is a couple hundred (?) pounds less in weight than the Outback, the NA engine might feel a bit peppier, especially if we tried it with a stick shift, which is her preference.
I suspect that we will test drive both the XS and XT versions of the Forester when we start to get serious this summer. Pros and cons:
1) as has been mentioned before, if you want leather with your XT, you can't have a stick. And, you gotta take leather and the sunroof together. And, the only choice of leather color is black. Wife isn't too sure of those restrictions, especially the black leather.
2) the color choices seem limmited with the XT. White, gold, silver, red and black. No blue, no green.
3) mileage and the fact that premium fuel is required (suggested? mandated? optional?)
4) the XT seems to be a hoot to drive, with good torque down low (unlike the WRX) -- I'm slowly teaching the wife the distinction between HP and torque.
5) the wife seems to be leaning towards something small, and the Forester is a handy size for parking lots and fitting into our garage.
In the end, it is her decision entirely. My biggest fear is that she won't do the due diligence and test drive the 2 or 3 "short list" vehicles and really compare their strengths and weaknesses. Or, that she'll be swayed by the best incentives and not the best vehicle for her needs.
<sigh> Not that it matters; it is unlikely that I'll get to drive it all that much anyway.
Michael- Your pros and cons are pretty accurate. I'd like to point out that you can always go after-market for the leather (which is what I did, pictures posted) which actually gives you the ability to customize (I went for a two-tone perforated configuration). The cost is about the same and you can normally go thru the dealer so that the leather is included in the price (if financing) and is fully warranted.
Yep, I did that when I got my Saturn in November of '02. The exterior color I wanted had a cloth interior, so I went the aftermarket route as well. Was able to match the headliner color exactly with the leather - a shade that is not available from the factory. I would have no objections to doing it again.
But, you would lose the ability to have the sunroof in the process.
See, I have a master plan in effect ... I've got my Saturn as the "boring, grown up" car, the wife gets a small SUV for dog hauling and poor weather duty, and in a few years we get the "toy" - a used Boxster (or equivalent) for summer weekends.
The only potential flaw in the plan is that the wife occasionally mentions getting a VW New Beetle Turbo Convertible .. our son drives a '99 New Beetle (which the wife used to drive) and she misses it at times.
I talked to the dealer about doing aftermarket leather and a sunroof for the M5 XT. He was talking roughly $1250 for each, with warranty. Seems significantly more than the cost if it were factory. (by my calculations: $1750 total, $750 of which was the leather).
Zman- $1250 probably includes $200 profit for the dealer. There's no doubt that not only is the PP a good package deal price wise, but there's no after-market equivalent for the huge factory moonroof. I sure hope that Subaru wises up and offers the PP with the MT for 05. Of course if they do I'll be mad that I missed out!
Just doesn't seem like this should be a big deal when talking about the Forester XT. Usually the reason most people go to a manual is to directly control the available power so that they can make the most of it when needed. That really isn't an issue with the XT...the AT XT just screams to life and shifts at just the right moments.
Discussions of sacrificing a lot of power in a vehicle in order to gain more control of the available power seems rather counter-productive. I would agree that well geared MT is more fun to drive than an AT if ALL ELSE is equal. Comparing a AT XT and some other competing model in a stick...things aren't even close to equal. I'll take the AT XT over any competitor in a stick for the fun factor.
Now my Passat 1.8T...that I wouldn't consider getting in a AT because there just isn't enough power there. But the MT makes the car pretty driveable.
The XT is my first AT vehicle (as my personal driver...my wife's last two cars have been ATs) and I don't find it lacking whatsoever.
I think I paid an extra $1500 for the leather in my Saturn .. but since I got the GM Supplier discount, I was OK with this.
I would think $1250 is about right -- you might be able to shave a couple hundred off, but is it worth the hassle?
Frank -- I, too, would like to see the leather and moonroof offered with the MT on the XT. I've mentioned to the wife that the new Legacy is coming out this year as well .. so perhaps that will be another one to add to her list.
Jack ... you might be happy to know that I mentioned your experiences with the snow to the wife. She was impressed that it took to the 12" of white stuff with no problems.
Of course, the last big storm we got, it dumped about 40" of snow in 48 hours. You needed either snowshoes or a Hummer H2 to get out of our neighborhood.
If I end up getting the XT (still have to find a 5-speed to test drive) and I do not like the seats, I might spring for the aftermarket leather but not the sunroof.
In your estimation is $1200-1250 for waranteed leather reasonable? By the previous entry, it seems to be. Thanks for the info, Michael.
Now my Passat 1.8T...that I wouldn't consider getting in a AT because there just isn't enough power there. But the MT makes the car pretty driveable.
Before I bought my Forester (an '00 S, not a new XT) the last non-Subaru vehicle I considered was a last-generation Audi A4 Avant 1.8T. It didn't seem happy with an AT, even in Tip mode.
Frank: Do you know if Katzkin can do alcantara inserts?
My XS surprised me with its torque when climbing up 6,000 feet over a 20 mile stretch. The only times I had to downshift out of 5th...
I'd never knock the X/XS; I think they're great. However, combine that long climb in your loaded vehicle with the need to pull out and pass a string of lumbering RVs on an uphill 2-lane road where passing opportunities are few and far between. That's where the XT shines, and it's why I bought mine.
3) mileage and the fact that premium fuel is required (suggested? mandated? optional?)
Subaru has indicated in writing that while 91-octane fuel is highly recommended to get maximum performance, the XT can operate safely on ordinary regular 87-octane. I don't think they intend that to be a steady diet, however.
I have operated mine on premium (93 and 91 octane) and on 89-octane midgrade. I can't tell any difference in performance or MPG among any of these. I don't plan to use 87-octane unless Cobb or another aftermarket vendor produces a reprogrammed engine control computer tailored for the lower grade fuel.
See, I have a master plan in effect ... I've got my Saturn as the "boring, grown up" car, the wife gets a small SUV for dog hauling and poor weather duty, and in a few years we get the "toy" - a used Boxster (or equivalent) for summer weekends.
Rather than buy, insure, and maintain 3 cars, how about settling on two that provide thrills. Say, a new Forester XT and a used Audi S4 Avant. The latter has terrific handling, lots of power from its twin-turbo V-6, great AWD, and practicality to boot. Or, if I really wanted a 3rd fun summertime car, I'd lean to a Miata.
I mentioned your experiences with the snow to the wife. She was impressed that it took to the 12" of white stuff with no problems.
It certainly exceeded my expectations, especially considering that I'm still on the OEM all-season tires. No way would I have expected them to do so well.
I'm trying to get down to one car. I never thought it would be so hard to find one vehicle that meets all our needs (or should I say needs and desires).
One car. Then first and foremost, it has to be versatile; a wagon bodystyle, for example. If you also want a high fun-to-drive quotient, it has to handle reasonably well. If inclement weather capability is important, it has to have AWD. If you're on a budget, it has to cost under $30K - preferably way under. And its cost-to-operate (fuel, insurance, repairs) needs to be reasonably consistent with its power and acceleration.
Low end: Forester X/XS.
Midrange: Forester XT.
High end, especially if nicer interior appointments and lower NVH matter: next Legacy GT.
Don't forget the WRX wagon. It'll be more fun (and cheaper?) than the X/XS and get superior mileage to the XT.
Honestly the WRX seems to fit the bill. Decent mileage, cheap, AWD, handles very well, some storage space and fast (once you get those RPMs up) and available with a MT.
Yeah...styling on the WRX isn't my cup of tea either but I figure thats for the buyer to decide. The WRX is another car I wouldn't get in an AT...(whereas the AT XT is more than adequate).
Averaged 22.2 MPG on today's fill-up. 200 L.A. freeway miles with speeds ranging from 65 to 90 mph. Average ~70mph; 60 around town miles. Ave 35~40 mph. Not bad for sub-500 mile break-in!
More than adequate is the understatement of the year. Although I bought the 5-speed, I think the XT AT is nothing less than superb...the better of the two.
What's funny (or not so funny) is that we already insure and maintain 3 cars -- have been for almost 18 months. Right now, we've got:
2003 Saturn L300 V6 - my daily driver. 23K miles (in 14 months!) Fully loaded, leather, sunroof, chrome wheels. Averages about 25mpg in mostly highway driving (70 miles round trip each day). Not real exciting, but gets the job done.
2003 Ford Focus ZX5 - 1700 miles; wife's car for the time being, will be daughter's car when she turns 16 later this summer. Replaced a 2002 Ford Explorer whose lease was due. 5-speed, Zetec engine, CD/MP3 player. Getting high 20's in mileage (haven't calculated lately) in mostly rural driving (2-lane, 40-60mph). Nicer car than I thought it would be.
1999 VW New Beetle - son is driving this and will buy it from us later this year when he has the money saved up. 56K miles, 5-speed, 2.0L gas engine. No power goodies, but a 6 CD changer in the trunk. Also gets about 27-29mpg in mixed conditions.
So, at the moment, we do not have a vehicle with AWD or 4WD - first time since 1997.
The intention is that the Subaru will become the wife's car when the daughter turns 16 this summer and the VW goes into the son's name (he'll be 18).
Shame on you. You're just like all the rest. I thought you were more sensible. Next thing, you'll be bragging about humiliating Cayennes and Camaros at stoplights. I am sooo disappointed.
Ballistic, I really don't know much about the Corvair and its demise, but I also had the impresion that Ralph Nader had something to do with that situation. Good, bad or indifferent, I couldn't even begin to say.
Even if Nader did kill the Corvair, IMHO that's the least of his sins. Of course, what I perceive as his greatest sin is something that you probably see as a virtue.
Changing the subject slightly, my first car was a 1962 Buick Skylark, with that little V8, a 2-speed automatic transmission, and a 4 barrel carb.
Now I have to finish catching up on the last few days of messages, to see what else I missed.
Jack- 90 mph around here isn't particularly fast and won't necessarily get you pulled over by a cop. There was a study recently the estimated that within the metro area, approx 8,000 vehicles a day exceed 100 mph (Yes people drive insanely fast around Atlanta).
Ed- I Katzkin is predominantly leather. In any case I didn't see alcantara listed.
The system is OK. Everything works, but I'm ready to go with the hitch mount now. Why?
First, all that Forester headroom means that it's a long lift to get the bikes on or off the rack. Next, the adapters to connect the Thule racks to the Subaru racks are just an extra piece of hardware to mess with. Not that big of a deal now that the racks are installed, but a good reason to go with the hitch rack initially.
Another reason is that I always worry about the bikes being securely attached on top. Guess that's yet another area where the sunroof is so useful; can look up to make sure the bikes are still there.
So when I get to my 30k service, I'll use my Chase Subaru bucks to get the hitch mount installed, then decide on the rack.
Coming down onto I-5 southbound from the 14 at 7:05 AM Sunday. Five pristine, smooth and deserted lanes ahead of me - I just had to let Her stretch her legs. Actually surprised to see I was doing 90. As I dropped back down (~80-75) a CHiPpie cruised past. He just glanced over - expressionless - and blew on by. Big City.
another car website gives the Baja Turbo final drive as 3.9 for the 5 speed. Shouldn't that put the final rpms with the XT 5spd at 70 mph at about 2635 rpm? That could explain the 24 mpg highway for a 3600 lb car that also has a bad drag coefficient of 0.36.
Many of us would have preferred that our XT's had been outfitted with more performance orientation, even at the sacrifice of some off road capabilities, in the area of tires/wheels.
I bought my XT intending to change to different tires as soon as the Geolanders wore out. I did use the Geolanders a few times in the (Sierra Mountains) snow and found them quite satisfactory. Nevertheless, it doesn't snow in the San Francisco area (those hills would be really something if that were the case!) and I don't go up the the mountains much. Since the XT has so much performance potential I decided not to even wait (several years at my rate of use) for demise of the Geolanders.
I was going to get some Falken Ziex 512 in 16" or Bridgestone LS-H Turanza (two top 11/03 Consumers Report picks for the "Performance All-Season" tire category. This would have cost $400-500. I didn't want to spend $1,500-2,000 I thought plus sizing to 17" wheels/tires would cost.
I just bought some ROTA SDR (Gold) 17" wheels at a very good price so I've decided to go the 17" wheel route.
I must admit that every white XT, like mine, that I've seen with gold wheels has looked outstanding!! (including that Forester STi !) I guess I was inspired!
I'm looking for suggestions for the new wheels. I'll probably buy all-season (e.g., I'll get tires that will allow me to go in the snow/mud and still give me lots of performance) rather than get "summer tires". Still, I'd be curious to hear non-all-season suggestions for tires too, as I could maintain two sets (the OEM 16" as well as "summer" 17 inch) of wheels/tires.
I'm leaning toward 17 inch Falken Ziex 225/50R17, or for about 1/4 more money, Michelein Pilot Sport A/S. Again, these would be all-season rather than just summer tires.
Have any of you plus sized your XT wheels or changed out the Geolanders?? What did you choose and why? Any other suggestions?
Bob- Given the short period of time the XT has been on the market, I don't imagine that too many owners have swapped out their tires yet. However, I would be interested in hearing about driving impressions from anyone who has.
90 mph around here isn't particularly fast and won't necessarily get you pulled over by a cop...approx 8,000 vehicles a day exceed 100 mph
We live in very different places. When I drive at 70 on I-5, I pass 5 cars for every one that passes me. I don't think there is a cop anywhere in Oregon who would watch you drive past at even 80 and not cite you. That, IMO, is exactly what they should do. I would not want to live in a state where people flying past my wife at 35-40mph above her posted-limit cruising speed are commonplace.
still looking at the XT, but maybe the '05 Outback?
No quarrel from me, I'm sure it will be very nice. Probably about 20-25% costlier, though. If you get by with one car, by all means make it one you really like.
I also had the impresion that Ralph Nader had something to do with that situation
That would be putting it mildly. He pounded the nails into its coffin with his distortion-filled book, "Unsafe at Any Speed". First-generation Corvairs concededly didn't handle as most Americans, accustomed to nose-heavy sleds, expected. However, they were not substantially different from other rear-engined cars of their era, including the wildly successful VW Beetle, 4-cylinder swing-axle Porsches, or Fiats like my lovely 850 Spider. And the 2nd generation Corvairs were very dramatically improved, but Nader's damage had already been done.
Jack- Yep they're crazy around here. I just remembered another telling statistic... the AVERAGE speed on metro interstates is 77 mph while the posted speed limit is 55 mph. What's really wierd is the avg rural speed in GA is 75, only 5 mph over the commonly posted speed limit of 70.
I only had to consult my Checkbook, now if I could only find a Wife! On a totally unrelated subject, it's great if you take your XT up to 80/90 MPH, however exceeding the posted speed limit by 25 MPH in most states can take you to Jail too!
I'll be in the same boat soon and I've been doing a little research. I want to go with a summer tire because I prefer the better grip in the twisties and like you said, I can just throw the OEM's on during the winter.
lark6 has 225/50/17's and Pilot A/S's on his Forester S. Unfortunately, there are not many summer tires in that size. Kumho KH11's is one.
Bob, Dennis, lark6, I am very interested in that 225/50/17 size (it's actually for my maxima) but have found very few options in the 'known' brands and all are quite expensive. Looking at the Falken, Kumho and Nittos. Don
Comments
-Frank P.
;-)
-Brian
Ballistic - I'll trade you my driver's seatbelt - it's so tight you won't be able to breathe or wiggle in it, much less slide around in your seat.
Agreed?
By the way, Jack, you've described right where I am.
Zman
As long as the vehicle in question has enough get up and go to merge safely onto a highway, that ought to be adequate.
Yes, the spouse is considering the FXT, VUE and Escape/Tribute for her next vehicle. Outside possibility to either the Santa Fe or Outlander. Auto show is in 6 weeks here in Denver, so we'll go and evaluate at that time.
John
In fact, I figure that the FXT is faster (0-60) than 99+% of the vehicles on the road today. So does anybody really need all that acceleration? Of course not but as Jack pointed out, it sure is nice to have on call when you want it :-)
If you're requirement is simply adequate acceleration, then you should be looking at the X or XS.
-Frank P.
A year or two ago, the wife and I test drove an Outback with the 165-hp NA engine and an automatic transmission. Seemed quite underpowered to both of us. Since the Forester is a couple hundred (?) pounds less in weight than the Outback, the NA engine might feel a bit peppier, especially if we tried it with a stick shift, which is her preference.
I suspect that we will test drive both the XS and XT versions of the Forester when we start to get serious this summer. Pros and cons:
1) as has been mentioned before, if you want leather with your XT, you can't have a stick. And, you gotta take leather and the sunroof together. And, the only choice of leather color is black. Wife isn't too sure of those restrictions, especially the black leather.
2) the color choices seem limmited with the XT. White, gold, silver, red and black. No blue, no green.
3) mileage and the fact that premium fuel is required (suggested? mandated? optional?)
4) the XT seems to be a hoot to drive, with good torque down low (unlike the WRX) -- I'm slowly teaching the wife the distinction between HP and torque.
5) the wife seems to be leaning towards something small, and the Forester is a handy size for parking lots and fitting into our garage.
In the end, it is her decision entirely. My biggest fear is that she won't do the due diligence and test drive the 2 or 3 "short list" vehicles and really compare their strengths and weaknesses. Or, that she'll be swayed by the best incentives and not the best vehicle for her needs.
<sigh> Not that it matters; it is unlikely that I'll get to drive it all that much anyway.
-Frank P.
But, you would lose the ability to have the sunroof in the process.
See, I have a master plan in effect ... I've got my Saturn as the "boring, grown up" car, the wife gets a small SUV for dog hauling and poor weather duty, and in a few years we get the "toy" - a used Boxster (or equivalent) for summer weekends.
The only potential flaw in the plan is that the wife occasionally mentions getting a VW New Beetle Turbo Convertible .. our son drives a '99 New Beetle (which the wife used to drive) and she misses it at times.
I talked to the dealer about doing aftermarket leather and a sunroof for the M5 XT. He was talking roughly $1250 for each, with warranty. Seems significantly more than the cost if it were factory. (by my calculations: $1750 total, $750 of which was the leather).
Was the dealer trying to make quick profit?
Zman
-Frank P.
Discussions of sacrificing a lot of power in a vehicle in order to gain more control of the available power seems rather counter-productive. I would agree that well geared MT is more fun to drive than an AT if ALL ELSE is equal. Comparing a AT XT and some other competing model in a stick...things aren't even close to equal. I'll take the AT XT over any competitor in a stick for the fun factor.
Now my Passat 1.8T...that I wouldn't consider getting in a AT because there just isn't enough power there. But the MT makes the car pretty driveable.
The XT is my first AT vehicle (as my personal driver...my wife's last two cars have been ATs) and I don't find it lacking whatsoever.
overtime
I would think $1250 is about right -- you might be able to shave a couple hundred off, but is it worth the hassle?
Frank -- I, too, would like to see the leather and moonroof offered with the MT on the XT. I've mentioned to the wife that the new Legacy is coming out this year as well .. so perhaps that will be another one to add to her list.
Jack ... you might be happy to know that I mentioned your experiences with the snow to the wife. She was impressed that it took to the 12" of white stuff with no problems.
Of course, the last big storm we got, it dumped about 40" of snow in 48 hours. You needed either snowshoes or a Hummer H2 to get out of our neighborhood.
In your estimation is $1200-1250 for waranteed leather reasonable? By the previous entry, it seems to be. Thanks for the info, Michael.
Zman
-Frank P.
Before I bought my Forester (an '00 S, not a new XT) the last non-Subaru vehicle I considered was a last-generation Audi A4 Avant 1.8T. It didn't seem happy with an AT, even in Tip mode.
Frank: Do you know if Katzkin can do alcantara inserts?
Ed
I'd never knock the X/XS; I think they're great. However, combine that long climb in your loaded vehicle with the need to pull out and pass a string of lumbering RVs on an uphill 2-lane road where passing opportunities are few and far between. That's where the XT shines, and it's why I bought mine.
Subaru has indicated in writing that while 91-octane fuel is highly recommended to get maximum performance, the XT can operate safely on ordinary regular 87-octane. I don't think they intend that to be a steady diet, however.
I have operated mine on premium (93 and 91 octane) and on 89-octane midgrade. I can't tell any difference in performance or MPG among any of these. I don't plan to use 87-octane unless Cobb or another aftermarket vendor produces a reprogrammed engine control computer tailored for the lower grade fuel.
See, I have a master plan in effect ... I've got my Saturn as the "boring, grown up" car, the wife gets a small SUV for dog hauling and poor weather duty, and in a few years we get the "toy" - a used Boxster (or equivalent) for summer weekends.
Rather than buy, insure, and maintain 3 cars, how about settling on two that provide thrills. Say, a new Forester XT and a used Audi S4 Avant. The latter has terrific handling, lots of power from its twin-turbo V-6, great AWD, and practicality to boot. Or, if I really wanted a 3rd fun summertime car, I'd lean to a Miata.
I mentioned your experiences with the snow to the wife. She was impressed that it took to the 12" of white stuff with no problems.
It certainly exceeded my expectations, especially considering that I'm still on the OEM all-season tires. No way would I have expected them to do so well.
Zman
Low end: Forester X/XS.
Midrange: Forester XT.
High end, especially if nicer interior appointments and lower NVH matter: next Legacy GT.
Not a bad choice in the bunch.
Honestly the WRX seems to fit the bill. Decent mileage, cheap, AWD, handles very well, some storage space and fast (once you get those RPMs up) and available with a MT.
overtime
overtime
200 L.A. freeway miles with speeds ranging from 65 to 90 mph. Average ~70mph; 60 around town miles. Ave 35~40 mph.
Not bad for sub-500 mile break-in!
-srp
More than adequate is the understatement of the year. Although I bought the 5-speed, I think the XT AT is nothing less than superb...the better of the two.
2003 Saturn L300 V6 - my daily driver. 23K miles (in 14 months!) Fully loaded, leather, sunroof, chrome wheels. Averages about 25mpg in mostly highway driving (70 miles round trip each day). Not real exciting, but gets the job done.
2003 Ford Focus ZX5 - 1700 miles; wife's car for the time being, will be daughter's car when she turns 16 later this summer. Replaced a 2002 Ford Explorer whose lease was due. 5-speed, Zetec engine, CD/MP3 player. Getting high 20's in mileage (haven't calculated lately) in mostly rural driving (2-lane, 40-60mph). Nicer car than I thought it would be.
1999 VW New Beetle - son is driving this and will buy it from us later this year when he has the money saved up. 56K miles, 5-speed, 2.0L gas engine. No power goodies, but a 6 CD changer in the trunk. Also gets about 27-29mpg in mixed conditions.
So, at the moment, we do not have a vehicle with AWD or 4WD - first time since 1997.
The intention is that the Subaru will become the wife's car when the daughter turns 16 this summer and the VW goes into the son's name (he'll be 18).
The "toy" will be several years down the road.
Shame on you. You're just like all the rest. I thought you were more sensible. Next thing, you'll be bragging about humiliating Cayennes and Camaros at stoplights. I am sooo disappointed.
Ballistic, I really don't know much about the Corvair and its demise, but I also had the impresion that Ralph Nader had something to do with that situation. Good, bad or indifferent, I couldn't even begin to say.
Even if Nader did kill the Corvair, IMHO that's the least of his sins. Of course, what I perceive as his greatest sin is something that you probably see as a virtue.
Changing the subject slightly, my first car was a 1962 Buick Skylark, with that little V8, a 2-speed automatic transmission, and a 4 barrel carb.
Now I have to finish catching up on the last few days of messages, to see what else I missed.
Ed- I Katzkin is predominantly leather. In any case I didn't see alcantara listed.
-Frank P.
The system is OK. Everything works, but I'm ready to go with the hitch mount now. Why?
First, all that Forester headroom means that it's a long lift to get the bikes on or off the rack. Next, the adapters to connect the Thule racks to the Subaru racks are just an extra piece of hardware to mess with. Not that big of a deal now that the racks are installed, but a good reason to go with the hitch rack initially.
Another reason is that I always worry about the bikes being securely attached on top. Guess that's yet another area where the sunroof is so useful; can look up to make sure the bikes are still there.
So when I get to my 30k service, I'll use my Chase Subaru bucks to get the hitch mount installed, then decide on the rack.
-srp
ZKLLRXT
John
Add to it that I need lots of clearance, and my wife needs to like it. I'm still looking at the XT, but maybe the '05 Outback?
Zman
I bought my XT intending to change to different tires as soon as the Geolanders wore out. I did use the Geolanders a few times in the (Sierra Mountains) snow and found them quite satisfactory. Nevertheless, it doesn't snow in the San Francisco area (those hills would be really something if that were the case!) and I don't go up the the mountains much. Since the XT has so much performance potential I decided not to even wait (several years at my rate of use) for demise of the Geolanders.
I was going to get some Falken Ziex 512 in 16" or Bridgestone LS-H Turanza (two top 11/03 Consumers Report picks for the "Performance All-Season" tire category. This would have cost $400-500. I didn't want to spend $1,500-2,000 I thought plus sizing to 17" wheels/tires would cost.
I just bought some ROTA SDR (Gold) 17" wheels at a very good price so I've decided to go the 17" wheel route.
I must admit that every white XT, like mine, that I've seen with gold wheels has looked outstanding!! (including that Forester STi !) I guess I was inspired!
I'm looking for suggestions for the new wheels. I'll probably buy all-season (e.g., I'll get tires that will allow me to go in the snow/mud and still give me lots of performance) rather than get "summer tires". Still, I'd be curious to hear non-all-season suggestions for tires too, as I could maintain two sets (the OEM 16" as well as "summer" 17 inch) of wheels/tires.
I'm leaning toward 17 inch Falken Ziex 225/50R17, or for about 1/4 more money, Michelein Pilot Sport A/S. Again, these would be all-season rather than just summer tires.
Have any of you plus sized your XT wheels or changed out the Geolanders?? What did you choose and why? Any other suggestions?
Thanks in advance,
Bob
-Frank P.
We live in very different places. When I drive at 70 on I-5, I pass 5 cars for every one that passes me. I don't think there is a cop anywhere in Oregon who would watch you drive past at even 80 and not cite you. That, IMO, is exactly what they should do. I would not want to live in a state where people flying past my wife at 35-40mph above her posted-limit cruising speed are commonplace.
If the Baja Turbo uses the same diameter tires as the XT, that would be correct.
No quarrel from me, I'm sure it will be very nice. Probably about 20-25% costlier, though. If you get by with one car, by all means make it one you really like.
That would be putting it mildly. He pounded the nails into its coffin with his distortion-filled book, "Unsafe at Any Speed". First-generation Corvairs concededly didn't handle as most Americans, accustomed to nose-heavy sleds, expected. However, they were not substantially different from other rear-engined cars of their era, including the wildly successful VW Beetle, 4-cylinder swing-axle Porsches, or Fiats like my lovely 850 Spider. And the 2nd generation Corvairs were very dramatically improved, but Nader's damage had already been done.
-Frank P.
lark6 has 225/50/17's and Pilot A/S's on his Forester S. Unfortunately, there are not many summer tires in that size. Kumho KH11's is one.
-Dennis
I am very interested in that 225/50/17 size (it's actually for my maxima) but have found very few options in the 'known' brands and all are quite expensive. Looking at the Falken, Kumho and Nittos.
Don