This is not relate to the RAV4 vs Forester discussion, but...
I read a newspaper article reporting about a rollover accident involving a Volvo XC90. Thanks to its rollover sensing system and curtain airbags covering all the three rows, no one was seriously injured, just a few scratches.
Had it not been for the curtain airbags, their heads might have been injured.
If you usually have more than three people in your vehicle, it's always better to have extra head protection.
bayview6- When I had my second flat I splurged and ordered a set of 4 tires and wheels from TireRack. Meanwhile, I probably drove at least a couple hundred miles commuting over several days until the new set of shoes arrived.
In most models where it's offered, the manual transmission does indeed provide a little more oomph when accelerating. (car magazines routinely get better 0-60 times with MT models). Manuals also usually get 1-2 mpg better than their auto equipped siblings. However, as you've discovered dealers are reluctant to stock manuals due to their reputation for being less desirable. Subaru actually is one of the better brands for stocking manuals but Americans in general tend to prefer the convenience of an automatic. I guess it's easier to talk on the phone, eat french fries and read the paper when you don't have to be distracted by the act of shifting ;-)
IRT AWD systems, Subaru’s full-time systems beat the RAV4’s part-time setup hands down. As to the differences between Subaru’s MT and AT versions, both do an excellent job but go about it differently. The AT system is more sophisticated but the MT one provides a constant 50/50 split and is a study in simplicity (less to go wrong).
Sometimes the "convenience" of the automatic is a lot less sinister. I've had to drive quite frequently in places with stop-and-go traffic [such as entries to military bases]. During that time I grew very, very tired of using a manual transmission. When the time came for me to replace my vehicle with one that better suited my needs, I had the choice -- more responsive manual transmission or the easier automatic.
So, my XT is an automatic. Do I miss the power and control of the manual transmission? Sure, but I also appreciate the ease of the automatic.
Kevin- I didn't mean to insult anyone. Of course there are a number of perfectly valid reasons why it would make more sense for somone to drive an automatic but you have to admit that many Americans are extremely disinterested in the actual act of driving.
I didn't mean for it to sound like I was insulted. Subaru drivers seem to put a lot more thought into cars (from selection of vehicle to driving to maintenance). I happened to choose my transmission preference based on solving a significant displeasure associated with driving the manual transmission.
I wholeheartedly agree that a great many people subject driving to a secondary or tertiary priority with respect to other activities like talking on a cell phone or watching their in-car video. I've also seen a great many considerate drivers who purposefully avoid those distractions until they've stopped their vehicles. It may only be that the disinterested drivers are more obvious, but there are certainly enough of them to notice.
Subaru did incredibly well overall, far better than Toyota or Honda for instance.
RAV4 looks nice, I checked one out the other day (Fitz in Gaithersburg has a Toyota dealer back-to-back with a Subaru dealer.
It's a lot roomier than before, and bigger than the Forester. Lows were poor visibility, the rear mouned spare only making it worse, and a gate that opens to block curb side loading at the grocery store or Costco.
I didn't get to drive it but the AWD is part-time and that's not ideal, they actually downgraded from the last generation. Interior has some cheap parts, but it's about par for the class. OK at $25k but not at the $33.4k Edmunds noted (as-tested).
Still, though, it's very competitive if you want something a little roomier than a Forester. I'll drive a V6 once they come out. Power/efficiency balance is impressive and there is a lot more room than Subaru offers.
Anyone with a 2006 Forester ride a bike (either road or mountain) and know if it will fit in the back? I suppose if the dimensions were unchanged in 2006 then a previous model experience would also be good. I don't recall the size of my bike but I'm just 5'11" so my bike isn't that huge. One nice thing about my 96 2door Explorer is that I can cart my bike around and keep it safely locked inside.
Why don'cha take a test drive at the Subie dealer? Bring the bike along plus a blanket or bedsheet to put under it. Take a test drive, and if you still like the Forester, then ask the sales guy if you can see if the bike fits.
Snow chains... I have asked 2 dealers and have 2 different answers. If you have to chain a forester with an automatic transmission, do you chain the front or the rear? Same for a manual transmission?
I know I'm starting to drive myself crazy when I begin to fret over the dashboard layout. :confuse:
Am I the only one who thinks the Forester is a bit lacking in the interior layout? Everything seems decent but after looking at all the storage options in a CRV and RAV4 I start to look at the Forester pictures and scratch my head. I appreciate a clean design like the next person but it would be nice to be able to store a few CDs, my coffee, my cell phone, and an Altoids can for my drive to work. And that's not counting useless junk I'm sure I'll collect. Seems like Subaru doesn't think a driver needs stuff like that which is odd considering they do come standard with 6 disc cd players.
Yea, I'm being picky now but I'm driving myself crazy trying to decide.
I think there is plenty of storage room. I have a 2005. With the armrest extension there is a bit more storage space. FWIW, it's like not buying a 3 series due to the lousy cup holders.
The owner's manual says front tires only. It doesn't specify any difference for manual versus automatic transmission.
It makes sense (to me at least). If the front wheels are getting power and provide the steering, those are the wheels you want to have the better grip on the road.
For my 04 Forester, it's in the owner's manual section on snow tires but not in the index.
Are you counting the flip-top storage bin on top of the dashboard? It's sizeable enough for several cds (probably a good dozen if they're in sleeves instead of cases).
The ones without the 6 disc changer have a storage bin below the stereo head unit also, I believe.
It's a little tight, sure, but you probably won't find much more room in any other vehicle built on a compact frame, as they're not wide enough to house the cavernous storage bins you'll find in F-150s and the like.
New to this board were there any replies to actual city / Highway gas mileage for 06 Forester 2.5 X with Auto trans? Looking to purchase but gas mileage 2nd important item on my list after safety..
I was looking for more research and saw a confusing article on the Forester about it's facelift which also makes some mention near the end of the line not lasting past 2007. Actually I'm not sure the last sentence is even proper grammar.
The face lift will last only a year or two. In 2007, an all-new vehicle will bow with the corporate schnoz from the recently introduced B9 Tribeca SUV.
Does that mean the Forester is due to be cycled out or redone or replaced?
Expectations are that the MY 2008 Forester (likely released summer-fall 2007) will be a complete redesign, encorporating a grill design similar to that of the current Impreza and possibly the Tribeca (depending on whether or not the 'beca's face gets a slight redesign as well).
Yes after 8 years and a couple of facelifts of the current model, the next generation Forester should arrive in 2007 or 2008. No one knows yet what the new model will look like. There's speculation that it will get bigger like the new RAV4 but it's only speculation at this point.
Calendar year 07, sure, but model year 08. That means around next April we'll see the new one, and we may see test mules and spy pics about a year from now.
They can't be sure about the face, too, they are probably making a final decision on the design direction right around now.
This might be better in another forum, if so please move it.
I'm thinking of a base Forester but one thing I'd like to upgrade is the stereo. I'm wondering if it's worth doing via the dealership or if I should investigate an aftermarket store like Tweeter or the like. I've never done an aftermarket stereo upgrade so I have no history on the places that do these changes and no knowledge if the Forester would present unique problems because of it's design or something. Basically, I don't know what I don't know.
The Forester is a much easier upgrade than say, the Legacy. Some stereo shops even have systems designed to fit into exactly the same slots as the current radio.
If you want great sound in the forester you will need to add some sound damping materials to the inside of the doors. Otherwise, you are just spinning your wheels.
If you want great sound in the forester you will need to add some sound damping materials to the inside of the doors. Otherwise, you are just spinning your wheels.
Really? I didn't think it was all that noisy during my two test drives. I'll have to try another test drive and keep my ears out for that. I certainly don't like the idea of sound dampening materials in the doors.
I think I'll stop by a local store that does car stereo stuff and see what they say. The problem is that, since I have no experience with aftermarket stereo installs, I wasn't sure what to expect. I was afraid the guys would tell me everything would be easy in order to just try to make a sale. I don't think I'd want anything fancy, but maybe just a simple upgrade. If it was something complicated or pricey then I might consider the factory installed option.
The simplest and most cost effective upgrade and the one that most improves the auditory experience is swapping out the cheap OE speakers for something better.
I hate to say this, but knowing that a new Forester - or whatever it'll be called - will be coming out in a little over a year and a half makes me somewhat sorry that I bought an '06 a few months ago. Yes, I'm most pleased with it, but when the new ones come out it'll look old before its time. And that will be well before I'll be finished with the payments. I'm sort of in the same position as someone who bought a Chrysler 300 in 2004
I wouldn't let it get you down. When you're making payments for 48 or 60 months, it's rare that a new model of your current car won't come out well before you're done paying. In your case (mine as well, I bought my Forester at the end of September) it may be a little sooner than average.
On the upside, however, the current model is proven to be very reliable and has all the bugs worked out; something the redesign might not accomplish until the second year.
Well, did you buy your Forester for only a few years' use or for the long run? My '96 Legacy is way out of style, but I got it to drive into the ground.
I have a '98 and haven't regretted it for an instant.
They kept adding equipment, too. First cruise, then power mirrors, then an LSD, then bigger rims, then 2 odometers, then a 2nd sunglasses holder, then a turbo engine option, etc.
The list goes on, but I bought the best option for me available at the time, and that's what matters.
Sure, the new one is almost always better, but it also will cost more, and you might argue yours is a better value (relatively speaking) as long as it meets your needs.
Also consider this - I've had no car payment for 8.5 years. In fact it lasted long enough that I bought a second car ('93 Miata, used), and then saved up for a down payment on a beach condo!
Depending on how much bigger Subaru decides to grow the Forester and how radically they modify the styling, I might seriously consider buying the last year of the current model :-) There's much to be said for boxy conservative styling with proven performance and handling in a vehicle that's just the right size for many people's needs.
Selfishly speaking, I'm hoping the Forester grows a bit, because I have 2 kids and a nanny, not to mention a dog. Our trips are a squeeze, as you can imagine.
But I don't want to drive a vehicle the size of Godzilla, either, nor do I want the gas mileage associated with them. And it has to be relatively nimble.
The roomiest vehicle so far that meets this criteria is the Mazda5, but it lacks AWD.
I hope that Subaru offers the next Forester in tow lengths, I'd get the LWB version and I'm sure Frank would be shopping for the smaller one.
I hate to be the one to tell you Juice but you either need to downsize the amount of stuff you take on trips or upsize to a bigger vehicle. Since I'm pretty sure you're not going to convince Lana to go along with former... I see a minivan in your future :-) Regardless, I don't see even a LWB Forester with a 3rd row being able to hold all your "stuff".
The nanny only comes along with us some times. We usually road trip to the beach by ourselves, but she comes once a year. We do drive around all week, though.
It might actually make more sense to RENT a minivan once a year for a week, then drive something smaller the rest of the time.
As for packing light - now that we can leave all our stuff at the beach (since we now own a condo), that's much less of an issue. I have the wife down to just 9 suitcases.
Well FRank, you right about upgrading the speakers option from Subaru, but I dare say that you are wrong about sound damping material. Been there, done that. It not only makes the Forester a lot more quiet from the road noise but it also improves the sound from the speakers. Check out any of the audio sites and they will tell you the same thing..
Good chance the new Forester will have less power than the current one because the epa is changing the way it measures mpg AND the gov't is increasing mpg requirements.. I bought my 06 because I like it the way it was and plan on keeping it until I kick the bucket, the LOrd willing and the creek don't rise.
well the current numbers are VERY legitimate and they exceed mpg requirements, so I don't see how that will affect the Forester's engine output as there is no need to adjust.
BTW I regularly get 27-28 mpg per tank in my '03 with a combined 80%/20% highway/city. EPA ratings were 23/28 for my MT.
How can the epa numbers be legitimate when they make up the numbers after running the cars on dynameters? My 06 Forester X premium is suppose to get 22 mpg around town and on my last tank I got about 18.
The epa even admits as much because they are changing the way they measure mpg by using real cars on real streets.
Ditto on my 04 I get 23-25 in town and 26-28 on hwy going 60-75mph. I got 28.8 on a tank in Montana going 50-65 on snow and wet payment last week on a 80-20 split. My mileage starting getting the best after 20,000 now over 40,000.
Pete- I think you confused me with someone else ;-) Certainly adding sound damping material is a good idea. I was just pointing out that upgrading the speakers is the easiest and most cost effective way to get better sound.
Adding sound damping material is either a labor intensive job that many owners won't want to tackle or an expensive one if you pay to have it done.
John: I already do pack like that, in fact the trailer I use is similar to the one in that picture!
HP: it won't go down, it's just using a different scale so the numbers will be adjusted up or down. But it's not making any more or less power, it's just measured differently.
Example - the Accord V6 went from 240hp to 244hp. Honda said the old one was actually making 234hp, so it gained +10hp compared to last year's engine, though on paper it only appeared to gain 4hp. In tests it has been quicker, so that confirms that the real gains were more than just 4 horses.
I bet the 173hp base engine is downrated, but I bet the 230hp turbo might even be uprated.
If it makes you feel any better, maybe my current situation will put some perspective on your feelings. I was hoping to make a new purchase in Jan. But I drove the RAV4 and decided to wait for the v6 in Feb. Now I learn it may be May before I can test drive a v6. Now, I like the Forester, and the 4 cylinder RAV4 is pretty darn good too, but for some reason I think I'll be cheated if I don't try the v6 and then decide. If I wanted to I could even make an arguement for waiting on the next version of the CRV. At some point you need to draw the line and decide. Easy for me to say ... hard for me to do.
Do I understand this correctly? Are at least two people saying that the best bet for audio improvements is aftermarket? So if I get a Forester it might be best to just go cheap on the stereo and then start shopping enhancements in the after market?
I hate to say it but one thing that really appeals to me is the mp3 player connection. It's stupid but when I see that in a new car I get interested. I assume you can add a new stereo to do this after but the wiring to your center console (for example) doesn't seem like an after market option.
At some point you need to draw the line and decide.
You are right. In any event, the fact that I'm quite satisfied with my 2006 Forester is what counts, that and the fact that I will do my best to keep it in good condition; the fact that it may not look like the current models come MY08 really doesn't matter.
Ever consider an AWD Ford Freestyle? Although it is about 2 feet longer, it not much wider or taller than a Forester, but it has 3 rows of seats and would easily be big enough for your needs.
There you go Juice! Knowing how fond of Ford products you are, the Freestyle would seem to be the perfect solution :P It may be a minivan masquerading as a cross-over but it is a good size for you and has decent looks.
Great packaging, the interior space is pretty perfect for what I want, but...
* driving it is as fun as watching paint dry * depreciation is a serious concern * reliability scores that I've seen are Poor * AWD is not full-time (may as well get a minivan, then)
I might actually consider a used one as a beater if they drop down to $10 grand in a year or two. But only with an extended warranty.
On 2nd thought, I've watched paint dry before, and I may have been unfair to Painters.
I prefer the Mazda5, it's a lot more fun, just no AWD. But it's closer to what I'd want.
Comments
I read a newspaper article reporting about a rollover accident involving a Volvo XC90. Thanks to its rollover sensing system and curtain airbags covering all the three rows, no one was seriously injured, just a few scratches.
Had it not been for the curtain airbags, their heads might have been injured.
If you usually have more than three people in your vehicle, it's always better to have extra head protection.
-Frank
IRT AWD systems, Subaru’s full-time systems beat the RAV4’s part-time setup hands down. As to the differences between Subaru’s MT and AT versions, both do an excellent job but go about it differently. The AT system is more sophisticated but the MT one provides a constant 50/50 split and is a study in simplicity (less to go wrong).
-Frank
So, my XT is an automatic. Do I miss the power and control of the manual transmission? Sure, but I also appreciate the ease of the automatic.
Kevin
-Frank
I wholeheartedly agree that a great many people subject driving to a secondary or tertiary priority with respect to other activities like talking on a cell phone or watching their in-car video. I've also seen a great many considerate drivers who purposefully avoid those distractions until they've stopped their vehicles. It may only be that the disinterested drivers are more obvious, but there are certainly enough of them to notice.
Kevin
RAV4 looks nice, I checked one out the other day (Fitz in Gaithersburg has a Toyota dealer back-to-back with a Subaru dealer.
It's a lot roomier than before, and bigger than the Forester. Lows were poor visibility, the rear mouned spare only making it worse, and a gate that opens to block curb side loading at the grocery store or Costco.
I didn't get to drive it but the AWD is part-time and that's not ideal, they actually downgraded from the last generation. Interior has some cheap parts, but it's about par for the class. OK at $25k but not at the $33.4k Edmunds noted (as-tested).
Still, though, it's very competitive if you want something a little roomier than a Forester. I'll drive a V6 once they come out. Power/efficiency balance is impressive and there is a lot more room than Subaru offers.
-juice
Matt
Why don'cha take a test drive at the Subie dealer? Bring the bike along plus a blanket or bedsheet to put under it. Take a test drive, and if you still like the Forester, then ask the sales guy if you can see if the bike fits.
Am I the only one who thinks the Forester is a bit lacking in the interior layout? Everything seems decent but after looking at all the storage options in a CRV and RAV4 I start to look at the Forester pictures and scratch my head. I appreciate a clean design like the next person but it would be nice to be able to store a few CDs, my coffee, my cell phone, and an Altoids can for my drive to work. And that's not counting useless junk I'm sure I'll collect. Seems like Subaru doesn't think a driver needs stuff like that which is odd considering they do come standard with 6 disc cd players.
Yea, I'm being picky now but I'm driving myself crazy trying to decide.
It makes sense (to me at least). If the front wheels are getting power and provide the steering, those are the wheels you want to have the better grip on the road.
For my 04 Forester, it's in the owner's manual section on snow tires but not in the index.
Kevin
The ones without the 6 disc changer have a storage bin below the stereo head unit also, I believe.
It's a little tight, sure, but you probably won't find much more room in any other vehicle built on a compact frame, as they're not wide enough to house the cavernous storage bins you'll find in F-150s and the like.
The face lift will last only a year or two. In 2007, an all-new vehicle will bow with the corporate schnoz from the recently introduced B9 Tribeca SUV.
Does that mean the Forester is due to be cycled out or redone or replaced?
Yes after 8 years and a couple of facelifts of the current model, the next generation Forester should arrive in 2007 or 2008. No one knows yet what the new model will look like. There's speculation that it will get bigger like the new RAV4 but it's only speculation at this point.
-Frank
They can't be sure about the face, too, they are probably making a final decision on the design direction right around now.
-juice
-Frank
I'm thinking of a base Forester but one thing I'd like to upgrade is the stereo. I'm wondering if it's worth doing via the dealership or if I should investigate an aftermarket store like Tweeter or the like. I've never done an aftermarket stereo upgrade so I have no history on the places that do these changes and no knowledge if the Forester would present unique problems because of it's design or something. Basically, I don't know what I don't know.
Really? I didn't think it was all that noisy during my two test drives. I'll have to try another test drive and keep my ears out for that. I certainly don't like the idea of sound dampening materials in the doors.
I think I'll stop by a local store that does car stereo stuff and see what they say. The problem is that, since I have no experience with aftermarket stereo installs, I wasn't sure what to expect. I was afraid the guys would tell me everything would be easy in order to just try to make a sale. I don't think I'd want anything fancy, but maybe just a simple upgrade. If it was something complicated or pricey then I might consider the factory installed option.
-Frank
On the upside, however, the current model is proven to be very reliable and has all the bugs worked out; something the redesign might not accomplish until the second year.
Doug
Even the silver looks the same.
Hyundai seems to be making a practice of copying success stories.
John
They kept adding equipment, too. First cruise, then power mirrors, then an LSD, then bigger rims, then 2 odometers, then a 2nd sunglasses holder, then a turbo engine option, etc.
The list goes on, but I bought the best option for me available at the time, and that's what matters.
Sure, the new one is almost always better, but it also will cost more, and you might argue yours is a better value (relatively speaking) as long as it meets your needs.
Also consider this - I've had no car payment for 8.5 years. In fact it lasted long enough that I bought a second car ('93 Miata, used), and then saved up for a down payment on a beach condo!
I'll take that over a shiny new model any day.
-juice
-Frank
But I don't want to drive a vehicle the size of Godzilla, either, nor do I want the gas mileage associated with them. And it has to be relatively nimble.
The roomiest vehicle so far that meets this criteria is the Mazda5, but it lacks AWD.
I hope that Subaru offers the next Forester in tow lengths, I'd get the LWB version and I'm sure Frank would be shopping for the smaller one.
-juice
-Frank
It might actually make more sense to RENT a minivan once a year for a week, then drive something smaller the rest of the time.
As for packing light - now that we can leave all our stuff at the beach (since we now own a condo), that's much less of an issue. I have the wife down to just 9 suitcases.
Just kidding. She's down to 8.
-juice
Now that's stuffed to the gills with stuff bungy corded on the outside too.
John
Pete
BTW I regularly get 27-28 mpg per tank in my '03 with a combined 80%/20% highway/city. EPA ratings were 23/28 for my MT.
John
The epa even admits as much because they are changing the way they measure mpg by using real cars on real streets.
Matt
Adding sound damping material is either a labor intensive job that many owners won't want to tackle or an expensive one if you pay to have it done.
-Frank
HP: it won't go down, it's just using a different scale so the numbers will be adjusted up or down. But it's not making any more or less power, it's just measured differently.
Example - the Accord V6 went from 240hp to 244hp. Honda said the old one was actually making 234hp, so it gained +10hp compared to last year's engine, though on paper it only appeared to gain 4hp. In tests it has been quicker, so that confirms that the real gains were more than just 4 horses.
I bet the 173hp base engine is downrated, but I bet the 230hp turbo might even be uprated.
-juice
I hate to say it but one thing that really appeals to me is the mp3 player connection. It's stupid but when I see that in a new car I get interested. I assume you can add a new stereo to do this after but the wiring to your center console (for example) doesn't seem like an after market option.
You are right. In any event, the fact that I'm quite satisfied with my 2006 Forester is what counts, that and the fact that I will do my best to keep it in good condition; the fact that it may not look like the current models come MY08 really doesn't matter.
-Frank
* driving it is as fun as watching paint dry
* depreciation is a serious concern
* reliability scores that I've seen are Poor
* AWD is not full-time (may as well get a minivan, then)
I might actually consider a used one as a beater if they drop down to $10 grand in a year or two. But only with an extended warranty.
On 2nd thought, I've watched paint dry before, and I may have been unfair to Painters.
I prefer the Mazda5, it's a lot more fun, just no AWD. But it's closer to what I'd want.
-juice