By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
Fellow Oregonian: Harping on the gradual decline of our beautiful language must be an Oregon thing. My personal favorite is "alot" instead of "a lot".
I'll be the Energy Czar only if I'm exempt from those fuel limits.
<ducks and runs>
-juice
Ed
-Frank P.
I'm loosing my spelling skillz. Blame rap music!
-juice
Bob
-juice
Why do I know this?
-The Mudge
My complaint was in fun and with good intentions. I would hate to have Juice go through life saying "noonie" (in print). It's like informing a friend that his favorite tie clashes with the color of his Forester (attempting to get back on topic).
james
Some of us also like to see most posts remain mostly on topic. /hint
btw Juice, was that a recent JD Power report? I was thinking there wouldn't an '04 reliability one out until May or so. Thx alot!
Steve, Host
Len
It won't work, though. Because. . .
"If elected I will give you twice as many coupons."
[pause for applause]
"At half the price."
[pause for more applause]
"And I'll balance the budget. . ."
[thunder applause]
". . . while still lessening our dependence on imported oil."
[deafening ovation].
Remember, vote early, vote often.
-juice
The question is, why didn't you know that it wasn't e.e. cummings, it was e e cummings - he was famously eccentric for never punctuating his name.
And don't ask me how I knew that.
But the XS is a more cold-weather friendly vehicle, with wiper de-icers front and rear, heated mirrors, and heated seats.
If I lived in the snow belt, sure, I'd say it was worth it.
-juice
I enjoyed a few of those in my wilder days. Or, at least I think I did, can't remember much that far back.
I'll be the Energy Czar only if I'm exempt from those fuel limits.
Of course you will be...
"Rules are only for those little people." / Leona Helmsley
The above line came from the epic work, Great Tragedies of Modern Life.
But should be. And sometimes the content ain't so hot, either. For proof, just review my stuff.
Or "I own two car's" or "its very fast but it's price is too high" and similar assaults on the poor, defenseless apostrophe.
Or "he went "xx", so I go "xxx", and then he went "xxx", and she was like, "xxx" ...
OK, OK, I'm done. I'll just go take a spin in my Forrrester.
-juice
Thanks for your honest and frank answers...no pun intended.
Mike
It is just a matter of habit.
Because of the nature of my work I fly to Western Europe quite often and lease the car over there.
It takes about half a day to get used to driving on the "wrong" side of the road and feel absolutely confident with the left hand on the steering wheel.
Vitaly
Thanks,
Kyle
-Frank P.
regards,
Kyle
A front one would make more difference anyway. You can get a Quaiffe for about $900, but again the labor charge would be prohibitive. Only if you rally, and only if you have sponsors.
Rich sponsors!
-juice
3 options:
A) Trailer hitch bike rack
C) Hatch mount bike rack
Seems the big plus to roof rack is that the bikes are up and out of the way. Doubt I would want the roof rack on all the time. How much hassle/time to put on - take off?
Would guess, easier to slide the hitch-mount rack on and off. Also, easier on the (human) back to load and unload bikes.
Having never used either - used a trunk-mount Allen rack - I’d like latest opinions from those with a preference...
srp
I used a roof top carrier, so that space was occupied. Plus, it's a real easy lift, just a couple of feet up. The bikes never touch the vehicle, not even close. Also good for low clearance.
Cons? Blocks your rear view a little, plus the price.
-juice
Am used to blocked rear view using the trunk-mount. No biggie.
Did you use Subaru's hitch or a 3rd party?
Any benefit to using the Sube part?
Bet I could get the local boys to install a drawtite or similar cheaper than Sube part and Sube install.
Lot of Thule hitch-racks at LLBean.
Thx x2
srp
You can go to www.yakima.com and see all the options for the Forester.
By the way, the Subaru accesory racks are made by Yakima, and you may want to look at prices on those. Sometimes, it's cheaper to buy them from an online Subaru parts seller than getting them from Yakima.
Craig
Is this a common complaint, or am I simply too used to my Volvo 850 (5 cyl. MT)? Since those road conditions comprise most of my traveling (his environment is more suburban), would the XT be a better fit?
My WRX seems even worse; on a road with 35mph speed limit, I have to leave it in 3rd to drive comfortably!
The XT might be a tad better than the XS, since it has more grunt down low. However, you still won't want to be running less than about 2000rpm or so when cruising in any gear. You can take the individual gear ratios and the transaxle ratio and use it to figure out rpm versus speed for the various gears:
Not a whole lot of difference between the XS and XT! In fact, the XS is turning a bit higher RPM in 4th gear. So, the XT's extra grunt would be the only thing that would make it more driveable in those ambivalent 4-5 situations. You'd really have to take a back-to-back test drive to see if it's enough.
Craig
Any Experiences??
Mike
The coldest it's been here in Virginia recently is about 12deg overnight, and I haven't had any issues starting our 03 Forester (2.5 H4), 02 Outback (3.0 H6), or 03 WRX (2.0 H4-T).
Come to think of it, I've never had cold weather starting problems with any car I've owned. All had stock batteries and most had 5w-30 dino oil (I run 10w-30 synthetic in my WRX).
Craig
If I'm merely cruising (maintaining current speed on reasonably level ground, as opposed to climbing a grade or wanting a lot of acceleration) my 5-speed XT is perfectly content at 1700-2000 RPM in top gear, which translates to about 40-46 mph. I don't downshift at those speeds unless conditions change and I need more than just mild acceleration.
Jack: I don't think there's a level stretch of road within 30 miles of me. I tend to cruise at about 2600 on them, which is why the XS was frustrating me in the 40 to 55 range (pretty standard spped limits for these roads, and they account for 70% of my driving). From the chart, it does not look like the XT would be significantly different from the XS.
Speaking strictly in terms of RPM at a given MPH, that's true, but it's almost meaningless. Not only does the XT make roughly 50% more actual peak HP and torque than the XS, its power curve is also biased more to low-midrange. Take my word for it: At (say) 45MPH (about 2,000 RPM) in 5th gear, the XT will easily out-accelerate the XS in 4th gear at that same speed. That's what will an XT effortlessly handle that 40-50MPH speed range being discussed without requiring any downshifting. It's an entirely different ballgame.
Also, you say there's no flat terrain in your area. I've never driven a car that devours hills and mountains like the XT. As I've written before, they seemingly cease to exist.
Does the standard boxer motor generate a rattling noise after time...looks like the XT has the fix???
-Frank P.
Not that I know of. I've read that article and I can only conclude that the additional torque generated by the XT was causing that particular problem. The normally aspirated 2.5 liter engine was designed to handle 166 lb feet of torque so when they added the turbo and upped the torque to 235 (250 actual?), they obviously had to beef up certain components to handle it.
-Frank P.
I've driven a friend's Corvette which has effortless power in any gear. You can be loping along at low speed in 6th gear and the engine won't complain if you floor it. However, it will take longer to accelerate (or similarly, maintain speed in the face of a hill) than if you downshift a gear. It responds a heck of a lot better if you downshift and get into higher rpms where the engine wants to operate. In fact, that's the whole point of a CVT -- it keeps the engine right in the sweet spot as speed changes.
In any event, I still think Walker needs a test drive to really answer the question.
Craig
Not to be impertinent, Craig, but do you own an XT?
The speed range that was originally referred to was not 40-45, but 45-55. That corresponds to 2000-2400RPM on an XT. Unlike your WRX, the XT can easily handle moderate hills at 2000RPM in 5th. At 2400, on anything but steep hills, downshifting would be more for entertainment value than out of any necessity unless the driver wishes to gain speed rather than to merely maintain.
I speak from considerable experience; there are lots of hills in and around Portland, and we have mountain ranges to the west and east. The XT flattens them.
Cheers for FHI.
Other than the above power/gearing issue, I enjoyed the morning I spent with the XS. Great upright driving position, visibility, and ease of access (much better than the 850 wagon on all three accounts). As empty nesters with two dogs, the cargo space and large rear opening are right on, and the car handled my long dirt driveway with ease and enough clearance (my major issue with the good old Volvo and any contemporary conventional wagons like the Passat).
And they still make an MT (unlike the new Volvo)!
Walker- Yep, the Forester XS seems well suited for your needs. Now add the XT to the mix and even your power/gearing concerns should be more than adequately addressed.
Craig- If you haven't test driven an XT you really should (on 2nd thought, it could be bad for your wallet). I can't think of a single instance during normal driving when I've felt the need to downshift the XT.
-Frank P.