Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Subaru XT Turbo Forester
This discussion has been closed.
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
I'm sorry if my comments sounded like an "extreme characterization." I do appreciate the vast knowledge and experience that has been shared in these discussions. It was just distressing for me to continually read about the XT's gearing gap from 1st to 2nd rather than how much fun the MT is to drive! I was feeling as though I had purchased the wrong car, and that is a terrible way to feel! I guess all I have to remember is which car, the MT or AT, made me grin wider. For me, it was the MT.
ibhaley:
Thanks for the congratulations and for your advice on "driving before signing." Again, it's nice to know that someone hasn't had a real noticeable experience of the gap between 1st & 2nd, though it obviously does exist. Hopefully, my XT will be a smooth shifter too. I'll keep you posted.
When are all these new XT owners going to post some photos??
Do you think the 5-speed XT gearing was to maximize acceleration or to minimize turbo lag? I'd say it was the latter and the benefit being the former.
As for the dipstick, the most repeatable way to measure it is to pull it out after you park and leave it out until you're ready to measure.
Ken
I don't think turbo lag minimization had much if anything to do with the 4.44 axle or with putting the wider-spaced (1st-to-5th) WRX ratios into the XT. XT turbo lag was already guaranteed to be substantially reduced (compared to the WRX) simply by putting the relatively small WRX turbo onto the 25%-larger-displacement STi-derived engine. An undersized turbo on a 'large' engine, other things being equal, will always have much less lag than the reverse. In addition, the STi's/XT's variable intake cam timing (absent from the WRX) also contributes to excellent and quick response to the throttle, across the rev range.
Another way to put this is that the XT can show positive boost 'right now', with hardly any lag, even at only 1,400-1,500 rpms! This contributes to quick power regardless of whether you're in 1st or 3rd or 5th (so long as you're at or above that modest engine speed). So, regardless of gearing, the lag has been carefully (and very effectively) designed out. 10% taller gearing wouldn't change that at all, any more than you experience significantly more turbo lag in an XT in 3rd gear than you do in 2nd. All you experience is a proportionately lower rate of acceleration, overall, reflecting the differing mechanical advantage inherent in the taller gears.
jack
With the advent of the XT, the Forester became (by just about any yardstick) a legitimate high-performance vehicle. Speaking generally, widely-spaced transmission ratios are not associated with high performance machines. I recognize that the WRX has the exact same gaps, but it's a special case to which I'll return.
In '56-57, GM introduced an all-synchro 4-speed. In the Corvette, it's 2nd gear was just 33% taller than 1st. Even in GM sedans, the gap was only about 40%. Same goes for the 4-speeds that Ford and Chrysler designed for their '50s and '60s musclecars. High-performance cars having a lot of power and torque per pound of car have (with a few exceptions) usually provided closer-ratio gearsets than their more-pedestrian brethren. It was a rare high-performance machine whose 2nd gear was more than 55-60% taller than 1st.
With its light weight, the XT has the power (and, equally important, the broad, flat powerband) to accelerate with nearly any of those cars. Yet the gap between 1st and 2nd in the XT is 77%. The rev drop going from 1st to 2nd is, comparatively speaking, huge. I've never said it's fatal, but it is at best awkward, and it's certainly unnecessary and sub-optimal. An owner of a turbocharged Forester in another forum described his experience after installing the transmission gearset from a (foreign-spec?) 5-speed STi, where the gap between 1st and 2nd is just under 50%. He raved about the improvement, both in daily street driving and on the strip.
You expect widely-spaced transmissions on underpowered econoboxes. You don't typically expect them on any car that has the power-to-weight to approach 100mph in the quarter. Even the plain-vanilla regular Forester's 67% 1st-to-2nd gap, together with 4.11 or 3.9 axles, would be a big improvement.
Back to the WRX: With it's comparatively small-displacement, highly-tuned engine and a turbo sized such that it doesn't start to kick in until you build some serious revs, the WRX is unarguably 'soft' on low-end torque. Add the fact that it has tenacious all-wheel-drive (hard to break loose to keep the revs up on launch to prevent bogging down), and you have a car that would be a slug off-the-line UNLESS it had a stump-pulling first gear. Ergo, even though I don't personally care for the WRX's wide ratios and low 1st gear, a case can be made that on that car, with that engine, it was necessary.
The XT is completely different! Thanks to more displacement, a relatively-smaller turbo, different tuning and ECU management priorities, variable valve timing, and so forth, the XT probably makes 50% to 70% more torque than the WRX at 1500-2500 rpms. That's a huge difference. With only a slight increase in weight, the XT flatly does not need such a low starting gear in order to deliver stunning first-gear launches off the line. Hitting the redline at barely over 30mph - in slightly over 1 second - is incompatible with top-caliber driveability in a car with this level of performance. Indeed, it might even be counterproductive. A properly-geared XT might actually beat ours to any speed above 30 or 40 mph. It also would be a lot more pleasant overall.
Everyone but me apparently loves the super-low first gear and doesn't seem to mind the giant step to 2nd at all. Or the 3100rpm at 70 cruise. I'm genuinely glad you're happy. As for me, I've driven a slew of fast cars with much better-chosen gearing, and I'm not thrilled. I think it was a major blunder that significantly impairs the experience of living with this car long term.
jb
I can only add, and most certainly deserves a coat of San Remo Red!
my 2¢: a Hot car deserves HOT paint!
srp
jack
Bob
Proud new owner here of a red 5spd XT. I have been lurking here for a few weeks and would like to thank everyone for their comments. This vehicle is the best kept secret on the market today. Is Subaru even promoting it? I’ve seen Lance Armstrong promoting the WRX but nothing on the XT.
My criteria for choosing a new mini-SUV was:
1) Safety
2) Good acceleration
3) Able to go moderately off-road to get to fishing areas and trailheads for hiking
4) 20+ mpg
5) Quiet highway ride
6) Manual transmission
The XT was everything I was looking for. Actually, it wound up being a tough choice between the WRX wagon and the XT, but in the end I opted for a little extra ground clearance. Plus I thought the XT was better in delivering its power than the WRX. If you like that kicked in the pants feeling of the WRX each time you rev above 3K and enjoy excellent handling, that’s probably the car for you. Very little turbo lag that I could notice in the XT. I liked the tach in the center of the console on the WRX. Subaru needs to do that with the XT. This is the first vehicle I’ve had that has the 'drive by wire' throttle, and it can be a little on the sensitive side. It takes a little effort to learn to accelerate smoothly from a stop.
I drove the auto XT for comparison, and have to say that if I had been looking for an automatic mini-SUV, it would have been a tough choice between the XT and the Tribute. Luckily for me I’m not married yet, so the choice was easy to get the 5-speed.
In summary
XT weaknesses:
* Appearance – a tall looking station wagon (although an advantage in that you won’t draw much notice from the local police)
* You don’t sit up high as in a true SUV
* Rear hatch takes some effort to close securely since it’s made of lightweight aluminum
* Tach tends to get lost in the shadows in bright sunlight
* Drive-by-wire throttle takes some effort to learn to accelerate smoothly
* Optional armrest may get in the way when shifting for some people with a manual transmission (try before you buy)
XT advantages:
* Great safety ratings
* Comfortable seats and nice interior
* Sports-car like acceleration
* All-wheel drive system inspires confidence off-road
* Full-size spare
* Hill Holder
* Puts a smile on my face each time I get in it
I achieved 21.4 mpg on my first tank of gas, about a 50/50 mix of city and highway miles at 5000 to 6000 feet elevation.
I'm looking forward to many happy miles in my new Subie!
-les
Play along with me on a scenario.
Fact: The very first, very tantalizing more-or-less official indication any of us had as to the XT's performance was Subaru of Canada's claimed 0-100 kph in 6.1 seconds. That translates to 0-60 mph in about 5.8 seconds - and in large measure, that's what sparked the intense early interest in the XT, long before there were any actual first-drive or test-drive reports by automotive writers or by prospective buyers. That SOC performance claim is, in large measure, what set the expectation and feverish early interest in motion.
Now suppose the XT arrived with 3.9 gears instead of 4.44. Even with the taller gears, the torquey, high-output, lightweight XT still would easily have equalled or bettered 0-60 in 5.8. That would be a sensational number by any definition for a moderately-priced all-wheel-drive crossover SUV.
Then the EPA ratings would have come out, probably around 20 city / 25 highway. Dare I say that these numbers would have been much more in line with the expectations of at least some of us?
Then, those of us who took XTs out on early test drives would have written pretty much the same glowing reports, validating the growing realization that NO other small crossover AWD SUV could come close to matching its performance or bang-for-the-buck quotient.
In due course, Car & Driver would have put one through a road test. Even with 3.9 gears, they would have achieved and reported 0-60 in (oh, let's say) 5.7, with the standing quarter in maybe 14.2 seconds at 94-95 mph. These numbers would have been FULLY CONSISTENT with the initial claim made by Subaru of Canada.
I find it incredulous, almost to the point of disbelief, that more than a microscopically tiny number of potential XT buyers would actually have refused to buy one SOLELY on the basis that its acceleration (0-60 in 5.7-5.8 and QM in 14.2 at maybe 94 was somehow insufficient!
With the possible exception of the XT's stablemate (the WRX), what other AWD crossover station wagon/SUV costing under $25-30,000 could you have purchased instead that delivers faster acceleration?
But assume, for sake of discussion, that some miniscule number of bona fide buyers actually would have snubbed a 3.9 XT because those performance numbers are somehow too slow. I submit that for every single sale lost for that reason, at least one or two more would have been sold thanks to the better overall balance delivered by still-class-leading performance PLUS 20-25 mpg EPA ratings and longer-legged highway cruising capabilities.
So: Would Subaru have experienced a net loss in XT sales because Corkfish and a few others say they would not have bought an XT with 3.9 or 4.11 gearing?
I think not. I think the reverse would have been far more likely.
jb
-james
John
I took it easy though... I usually cruised at 85. My grandad, who loved American V-8s advised me to go easy on the freeway, "cause them little furrin' motors will blow up if you drive 'em fast." My reply was, "it's ok... they're made for high RPMs"
I think Subies are too.
-james
As for 80mph at 3200 rpm, my 5-speed XT spins at nearly 3,500 at that speed.
jb
Having already spent 24 large on my XT, I'm not exactly anxious to spend a couple thousand more to correct what I regard to be a significant design flaw. If Subaru will share the cost to correct the problem, that would be acceptable.
As for your BMW, most if not all German cars are engineered to maintain near-maximum sustained speeds on the Autobahn. Nothing like that exists in North America or Japan or any of Subaru's other major markets.
It may well be that Subaru's engines can withstand high sustained revs - for awhile. The question is, how long? Anybody want to make a case that an XT engine spinning 3,500 rpms at 80mph will last as long as the same engine turning 3 thou at the same roadspeed would?
jb
I didn't mind the gearing at all. Rev it in first, and in 2nd the engine is not bogging because low-end torque is good. The XT felt fast at any rpm, in any gear.
Since I didn't sense any "valley" in the power delivery, I think gearing is OK.
The GT has much small diameter tires, so I doubt it'll get the shorter final drive.
-juice
-juice
And I echo juice's comments about the 1-2 shift not really being an issue (to me). I think it probably has to do with the fact that our 98 Forester 1-2 does have quite a big gap to begin with so perhaps we were already used to it.
What I did find was that it was easy to lurch the XT from a dead stop because of the massive torque and short gearing. There was one stoplight where I jerked across like some manual tranny newbie!
Ken
What's ridiculous is your absurd solution. The buy has obviously already occurred. The 4.44 gearing blindsided all of us who already owned XTs before that became known. Perhaps you're in the fortunate position to blithely walk away from a $24K investment. I'm not.
Adios, folks. Until recently, it's been mostly fun.
Could it be for once that I'd do better by going with the automatic? The tradeoff would be between the MT's better torque distribution and the AT's better gearing. Hmm...why not put the 4.11 in the MT and VTD in the AT and make everyone happy?
Ed
she insisted on the AT and to me it is a bit laggy out of first gear, so i want to rant about a 5 speed auto please. when the AT gets to the middle of 1st gear it is torque heaven from then on. but then again, since i am in the break-in period, maybe it will be different in the the AT 1st gear low end?? after having my odyssey barely moving the rpm guage at highway speed, it is difficult adjusting to the higher revs.
ok now back to my life in rain flooded nj... this car is incredible. i just cant believe what i have missed by not having a subie before.
when i bought the xt i thought the xt 2nd row was adequate. now having those beasts in the 2nd row kicking my back cuz they can reach the rear of my seat is wearing thin. anyone know of a mod so that i can put them where the dog would go? hehehe. but seriously this car is too small for a people hauler and we use the odyssey for what it does best, haul stuff to the dump and shuttle people around and not have kids kicking me in the back all the way there.
If you're unhappy with something, isn't CONTACTING the best way to notify the manufacturer? Call Subaru and let them know! We (as townhall members) know how you feel here but obviously can't do anything to help your situation.
-Brian
My opinion: Subie did the final drive to help avoid transaxle dump problems from the tuner crowd dropping their clutches. Probably lots of other reasons, but a few broken drivetrains would do a lot to dissuade potential buyers.
John
The evidence is there that suggestions and wants posted in these forums have found their way into new Subaru models. Not everything, mind you, and there's no way of knowing for sure if this was the only source of input, but they have nonetheless. It makes me happy to know that the company listens. It also reinforces the notion (at least for me) that I'm not a lone voice in the wilderness when it comes to some of the things I'd like to see in a future Subaru.
Ed
MikeF
The manufacturers do listen, which is what this is all about. And for Jack, we want you back and appreciate your input, don't take it personal please.
John
Patti can only read so many boards, I doubt she's following this board that closely. Meet the Members, Suggestions, Crew Cafe, those are discussions we know she reads.
-Brian
MotorWeek show #2250
With Host John Davis
PBS Broadcast Window Begins August 15, 2003
Road test of the new, sensible 2004 Subaru Forester
There's no information on which models are included in the test, but it might include an XT. If you miss it, you can read the test at the MotorWeek web site at:
http://www.mpt.org/motorweek/
But man does it FLY! :-)) This has got to be faster than my old Supra Turbo and my GS-400! And I haven't gone over 4,000 RPM yet...:-))
The dealer had tire pressures at 34 front / 32 rear - the car is riding a bit rough. What pressure would any of you recommend for a slightly softer ride but without compromising handling?
Thanx--
My simple thought is - I use to complain about the so-so power of the Subaru and didn't want the WRX - the XT fills the bill and then some.
BTW with 5,500 miles on mine (AT) I'm averaging 20 - 21 MPG. For the joy of having a vehicle that wakes up some super cars the low MPG and the cost of gas is worth every penny per SMILE.
My only problem is IF the B4 ( http://www.subaru.co.jp/legacy/bt/index_f.html - Legacy - Also NOTE the Forester too - Sorry its in Japanese, but this is the Fuji Heavy Industries / Subaru website) arrives in 2005 or 2006 and has the 3.0 H6 with twin turbo and tiptronic AT I may have to trade the 2002 VDC in :-)
Remember you don't have to buy the XT - But you will miss what IMHO is the best Subaru yet..........
Fascinating discussion regarding final drive ratios. I have learned a few things about auto performance I didn't know before.
I have yet to drive an XT, so I can't contribute anything to this debate. When I tested the WRX sedan, I was taken aback at the amount of turbo lag. The 2 ltr turbo didn't even generate as much low-rev torque as my old underpowered Civic Si (1.6 ltr semi-VTEC). I quickly adjusted my shift points to compensate, which worked fine. Subie turbos are definitely cars which require high revs.
Having read what Jack (and those who disagree with him) have to say about drive ratios, I look forward to testing an XT.
My 2 cents - It sounds very much like Subaru may have opted for a higher final ratio for marketing reasons. The XT's acceleration numbers have attracted a huge amount of attention in the auto media. The only other SUVs (mini or otherwise) I have ever read of which make 0-60 in less time than the XT do so courtesy of aftermarket mods.
Is there a stock vehicle comparable to the XT which is anywhere near as quick? I haven't heard of one. The XT is in a niche of its own. Smart marketing.
Jack, keep posting. I value your opinions and your clear writing style.
Dont you love living in a country where we all get to act crazy in our own way and then talk about it?
I felt the XT was quieter, and I don't think it revs as high as the CR-V.
Still, Honda and Subaru figure an MT buyer wants performance first, and is more likely to put up with the trade-offs. They can always get an auto if they want a more relaxed ride.
Jack: stick around buddy, people are going to disagree once in a while, but that's life. We wouldn't even have anything to discuss if we all agree on everything. Imagine:
Love the XT. Me too. Yeah. Great ride. Yeah. OK, see you later. The End. Archive the topic, hosts. ;-)
Sam: experiment with tire pressure, try 29/29 maybe. Don't go lower than that, though.
-juice
232 / 15.5 = 14.96 mph, did someone put an ford expedition engine in their by accident?????
driving was 35% highway, 65% suburban ( lol not city ). usually had 3 or more bodies inside.
as far as driving style, i did not rev above 4k, i did accelerate firmly out of the many corners in the suburban driving. highway driving was fairly low speeds ( too many speed traps in these tiny nj towns around here ) so highway speeds in the 50-60mph range.
so the next time i see that gas light come on, i might be cutting you off to get to the gas station....
btw. i think the odyssey is the best driving van out there, but it is a van ( 23 mpg on avg ), so it is not fun to drive and does what a van should do very well, haul bodies, move things, dump runs, etc....
jb,
c'mon, man, don’t let a couple of nasty jabs take you out of the ring. your cogent style and pragmatic observations make this board.
-srp
Jack, please don't leave this discussion group. Even though I don't always agree with everything you say, I have really enjoyed reading your well thought out arguments. You add real value to this group.
-les
Keep in mind it's pretty green, it'll improve as it breaks in. Mine did about +2mpg after 15k miles or so.
Folks, let's try to keep this board constructive and informative, with a positive tone. The regular Forester thread has been kept that way for 5 years or so.
Is the XT too fast? Yes, it's ridiculously quick, to the point of absurdity.
I want one. ;-)
-juice
Len
-juice