I have a 2003 Forester with auto transmission. I just notice that the air big light is on. The car is now out of warranty. What the reasons for that? What can I do? :confuse:
In 2006 the "Air Bag" light is on if no passenger is riding. Is this what you are talking about, or does your model have only one light, on the dash? In many cars that is a reminder light to have them serviced, which I beleive at your mileage might be the case.
The '03 doesn't have the weight sensor for the front passenger airbag, so that is not causing the light to come on. You should get it checked out ASAP, it either is a sensor or a malfunction of the bag itself. It is not something that comes on at a particular mileage.
I think the airbag warranty may be longer than the powertrain warranty, though I'm not certain.
Thank you Brian. You're right. I check the warranty book. Air bag is a major component and with 60 months or 100,000 km. warranty. I'll book an appointment to fix it soon.
I have a 03 Forester and my air bag light goes on due to a loose wire juction box under my seat. I guess it was due to my son always hitting the wire with his foot when he uese to sit in back of me. If anything now hits the wire harness under my drivers seat the light goes on. All I have to do is push the junction box together and it goes off till the next time it gets moved. they were going to fix it at 97,000 miles under warrenty but I never made it back till well over 100,000 miles. I now have 117,000 miles on it and it is to late to due it under warrenty
Our Forester only has 1k on it, and I guess that could be related: I am experiencing a symptom that is slowly driving me crazy. This symptom only is noticeable during in-town driving. I am finding it impossible to drive in first or second or third, and sometimes fourth, at a steady throttle/constant speed, without the car wanting to buck and jump. Not horribly, but enough to be very noticeable. Best example I can think of as to when I sometimes want to drive at a low speed with steady throttle: cruising across a mall parking lot, approaching the parking slots. We have two other manual transmission cars, 2000 S70 Volvo, and a 2002 3 series BMW, and neither car exhibits this behavior. Could this go away with break-in? Does the 2006 Forester have a drive by wire throttle and could that be the source of this sensitivity? It's like the system only likes zero throttle or accelerating throttle.
Our '02 Legacy has this overly sensitive throttle, it feels like an on/off switch at the beginning of travel. It's not you, it's the throttle sensitivity.
I think Subaru did it to obtain good EPA mileage numbers. Note that the 06 models' mileage dropped slightly, so I bet they went back to a more linear throttle.
My 04 Foretster XT manual used to do this for the first few thousand miles. Then, the throttle-by-wire system seems to have "learned" my driving style and has smoothed out a lot. Give it some time, maybe it will get better.
Tried that once, then took it to the dealer. They were really cool about it, swapped out the whole throttle cable ('02 was pre-fly-by-wire) and gave us a Mercedez-Benz C240 4Matic loaner car.
It's a bit better now, but I still don't think the throttle is very linear.
it could also be related to the AWD. My '03 without the wire throttle will buck like a champion bronco if I don't do certain actions in town driving. Since they are automatic for me, I will probably miss some. Here is my short list of anti-bucking practices:
1) Keep rpms low (between 2k and 3k). 2) Do not take your foot totally off the gas without pushing in the clutch at the same time. Do not pump the gas pedal at all (going from accelerate to decelerate). 3) Practice smooth driving by not tailgating, and anticipate red lights.
Note at highway speeds in 5th gear, these don't apply.
Thanks guys, I feel better. We've had the car for a few weeks now and it wasn't obvious to me at first that it wasn't my unfamiliarity with the car that was causing the problem. I think perhaps with time I will become smoother and may get to where it doesn't bother me. Actually my driving style may be part of the problem - I am really easy on the throttle. Just for instance, I am more likely to do an early shift than leave it in the lower gear - in town, that is. Might not notice much if I was on it a little harder.
I completely agree with John. I've been driving stick shifts for 35 years, and in my opinion, the most important point in smooth operation is to get the feel of pushing in the clutch a split second before letting off the gas. If you do this in reverse, you'll never be smooth, especially at lower speeds, in lower gears. Hope this helps.
My problem is not occurring at the shift points - it occurs with my left foot off the clutch, just trying to maintain a steady (slow) speed, like in a parking lot looking for a space. In that situation, the accelerator is Super sensitive. It feels like a millimeter of pedal movement is all it takes to go from accelerate to decelerate. As I said, my other two cars with stick shifts don't act this way.
I have the same experience with an '05 FXS. On my evening commute I may get stuck in a 2-plus mile traffic jam on a major commuter highway where the road first shrinks from 3 lanes to 2 lanes, then goes past several on-ramps for an office park with 10,000+ workers. Traffic doesn't stop, it will crawl non-stop at 5-10-15 mph if you resist the temptation to keep 10' behind the car ahead of you and just focus on keeping your car in motion.
I've always had a stick shift, so I was really surprised at the buckin' bronco characteristic of the FXS 5-speed manual tranny. As you say, it seems very difficult to control the drive-by-wire throttle in order to engage gears smoothly. On other cars I have had the same challenge in getting a smooth ride but am more successful in avoiding the jerky engagement.
Surprise! I don't think the throttle is to blame. I'd say the AWD is at fault here. My feeling is that whatever controls the transfer of power to the wheels is free wheeling until you let up the clutch, then it grabs abruptly when the demand for traction is recognized - BUT - the AWD does not supply power simulatenously to both front and rear wheels. What I'm feeling by the seat of the pants is that the rear wheels are engaged first, then a split second later the front wheels are engaged. The bucking is caused because of the rear end "bumping" into the front end. Your natural reaction is to push the clutch in a little bit / let off the gas, then apply gas and clutch again. What usually happens is that the bucking cycle repeats. And repeats.
As you say - this happens only at slow speeds in specific scenarios. For my bumper-bumper traffic situation, avoiding this is just a matter of focusing on maintaining motion, not on maintaining a fixed distance behind the car in front (also means less brake wear!) It's a minor aggravation (a Subie quirk?) and should not detract from your overall enjoyment of your new Subie.
But, on a manual Forester, all power goes through the center hydraulic diffy, at roughly 50% per axle.
The bucking is simply a result of a lot of moving parts connected together. Whenever that happens, you can expect some unavoidable "slop" going from accelerate to deccelerate (not in the connections, mind you, but in the slight bending of the shafts/joints/gears etc that are in the loop). It is that "slop" that creates the bucking affect. The MT AWD transmits that slop directly to the engine whenever the clutch is engaged, and vice versa.
It is not too different from a motorcyle when you go on and off the gas. There is slop in the transmission between the engine and rear wheel, the result is the bike dives a bit and raises up a bit whenever the throttle goes from off to on, and vice versa.
I rarely hear of anyone wanting to keep a car past 80K, let alone 110,000 miles!! Most people prefer something new more often.
But my hat is off to anyone willing and able to squeeze 100K + and every last dollar out of their purchases. I just like that new car smell to much, I guess....
ON MARCH 20, 2006, THE SYMMETRICAL ALL WHEEL DRIVE SYSTEM OF MY 2005 SUBARU FORRESTER XT FAILED, THE VEHICLE FISHTAILED AND DRIFTED, RESULTING IN A ROLLOVER, AND SEVERE BODILY INJURY. THE VEHICLE WAS SO FLIMSY, IT WAS DISGUSTING. EVERY DOOR AND WINDOW OPENING COLLAPSED, GLASS FLEW EVERYWHERE. THE CEILING COLLAPSED ON THE PASSENGERS' HEADS. THIS IS A DEATH CAR. *NM
It's sad that the car was destroyed and people were hurt - my heart goes out to them - but I've seen photos of Forester rollovers, and it would have had to have been at a pretty high rate of speed for the car to be destroyed like that. Not to mention that AWD isn't the same as traction control, and neither is going to prevent every type of accident. The bulk of that responsibility rests on the driver.
And so what if he was high? Being high didn't make the car so damn flimsy! And imagine glass, flying everywhere, possibly hurting others, when he rolled it going 65 MPH. They just don't make quality glass these days!
We're expected to believe this person has owned one for 2 years or so and cannot SPELL Forester?
SYMMETRICAL ALL WHEEL DRIVE SYSTEM ...RESULTING IN A ROLLOVER
As if the driver behind the wheel had nothing to do with it.
Here's the real story. Some teenager took mom's Forester out for a joy ride, lost control, and then made up this story. They went to NHTSA because they figured documenting this bogus story would let them off easily with their parents for what was actually wreckless driving.
In actuality, this "DEATH CAR" is the IIHS' safest in class:
"Here's the real story. Some teenager took mom's Forester out for a joy ride, lost control, and then made up this story. They went to NHTSA because they figured documenting this bogus story would let them off easily with their parents for what was actually wreckless driving."
Naw.
Some Attorney told them to do that, so he might get a fat check, his 40% of the damage settlement for shifting the blame from the driver to the car.
The problem with these NHTSA complaints is that anyone can enter them and they don't have to be verified.
Unless you notice a clear pattern of problems, you can't really call the data significant. With the CR-V engines fires, we saw dozens of reports, I think it was up to 60+ by the time all was said and done.
The only one I've seen an actual photo of was the guy from Australia that had a huge 4" lift, Lovell springs, big tires, the works.
His Forester rolled while on an off road trip. It was a '98 or '99, but it held up amazingly well. None of the glass broke at all. The passenger cell was completely intact. Of course he was traveling slowly at the time.
Not a stock suspension, plus most rollovers are "tripped", they don't just roll by themselves (Jeep Liberty excepted).
It looks like the Outlander no longer competes with the Forester. It has followed the lead of the RAV-4 and has gotten bigger and more crossover-like, with an optional (and useless) third seating row and is of course slushbox-only. Based on early reports it seems as if the new CR-V will also be a larger crossover. As far as I can tell, the Forester's closest competitor is the Tuscon, and it's not all that close. The Forester is becoming more and more like a vehicle without true competition. The question remains: is this good or bad?
Outlander, Sante Fe, RAV4, and XL7 have sort of created a new class, "former compact SUVS that are now near mid-size crossovers". Something like that. All offer 3 rows and aren't really compact any more.
CR-V is bigger but still no 3rd row. I think it's closest competitor will be the new Ford Edge.
Tucson slotted beneath the Santa Fe when that one grew, so it does compete with the Forester.
The Suzuki Grand Vitara is also just about Forester-sized.
The new Jeep Patriot even resembles the Forester, with its boxy green house. There's another.
Subaru has a difficult decision ahead of them. Do they stay in this class (which limits the prices they can charge) or move up in size along with most of the competition?
That might bump in to the Tribeca, though. Tough call.
My vote would be to keep the Forester compact as it is now. I personally don't see a need in a big 7-seater. When we travel long distance as a whole family, we simply take 2 cars, to accommodate everyone comfortably.
That also makes it easier to allow for different activities for different members of the family. Say, my daughter and I want to go to the beach, and my husband and son want to play mini-golf - no problemo, we take our 2 cars and go wherever.
Although we find more and more often that children want us parents to go to the beach/mountains by ourselves and leave them in the house with pizza and computer games :mad:
Come to think of it, I spend 90% time alone in the car, about 8% time driving with someone in a passenger seat, and only 2% of time I have someone on the back seat.
If by chance we ever need a bigger 1 vehicle for the whole family to fit in, we'd simply rent a minivan.
Forgot about the Patriot, but you're right, that's pretty close to the Forester in many ways. The Compass too, though it pains me to think of the Forester in the same class as that abomination. I always thought of the Grand Vitara as being larger than the Forester, same for the Sportage, but I suppose that's not really true. Both of them sort of look bigger because they're more truck-like. Speaking of size, now that the SX-4 is out the Forester is no longer the smallest SUV on the market.
I don't consider the SX4 an SUV. It's a tall hatchback. It's smaller than the Outback Sport, even.
Ok, you may consider the Forester a tall wagon, but it's not a tall hatchback.
I have the Miata for the times I'm alone, commuting and such. The Forester has become the family car. I'm very rarely along in there, only if it's snowing or if I'm going to Home Depot, and then it's loaded with payload anyway.
So for me, its replacement will likely have to be bigger. I'd say I'm alone in it about 10% of the time, alone with my wife 30%, and 60% of the time it's carrying the kids.
I have a 2004 Forester 2.5X with the EXACT same problem. I have 24K miles and orignal tires. Dealer just balanced tires and could not duplicate. The symptoms you describe mimick our's exactly. Did you ever get a solution? You would think Subaru has a known fix for this.
I like to drive a manual transmission. It's fun, gives me more road control and just is a better driving experiance. Besides, I find automatics generally boring to drive. I am researching small, AWD SUVs to find one that has lots of bells and whistles, is reliable, relatively fuel efficient, comfortable, and well built. Every year another manufacturer sends their MT small SUV the way of the Do Do bird. 2006 Toyota RAV4, followed by 2007 Honda CRV and 2007 Mitsubishi outlander. :mad:
What's a MT lover with the heart of a European driver to do ?? Anyway the Question is this: Is the 2006/2007 Forester the little SUV I've been looking for to replace my aging RAV 4 with 5 speed manual. I thought so, but then I read the Edmunds consumer reviews on the 5 speed manual with the regular 166 HP engine and found that several people are complaining of occillating RPMs after cold start-up, hesitation, and jerkiness when trying to accelerate from low speed. What's up with that ? Does anyone have info on this? Is it really a problem or is it just a matter of the driver adjusting to the car ? :confuse:
sric writes: Is the 2006/2007 Forester the little SUV I've been looking for to replace my aging RAV 4 with 5 speed manual
I am about six weeks and 1400 miles into owning a new Forester/manual/base-engine. I am coming to this car from two manual xmsn cars that we still own: a Volvo S70 and a BMW 330ci. I've owned three BMW's, two Porsches, two Beetles, all with manuals, so I'm kinda biased toward the feel of the German shifters and transmissions. The volvo is barely acceptable compared to the BMW and the Forester. I have to say that the Forester has been a complete and pleasant surprise to me in how the shifter feels and shifts. It's very solid, I get reliable shifts, it's fairly short-throw, and I am completely satisfied. As to the oscillating RPM, I haven't seen that - but I have seen some jerkiness upon initial application of the throttle. I have adjusted some, but I suspect there may be some design issue, I recommend you check that out. It also could be that the turbo version would not exhibit this behavior. The rest of the Forester is just wonderful: perfect size - not too big, not too small, the quality seems excellent, I like the styling, it's a great little car. And by the way: I was looking at the 2007 CRV early reports, and when it became clear they were going to eliminate manual transmissions, the only thing left to consider in my opinion was the Forester and I have not been disappointed. Gas mileage figures on five tanks so far: 24, 23, 29.5 (all highway), 26, and 25. I am a pokey driver so these are probably the best case you could expect. Regular gas!
I recommend the Forester LL Bean edition, with a manual trans. It's more fuel efficient than the XT, since you mentioned that was important, and runs on cheaper regular fuel. It has two-tone leather, a wood/leather steering wheel (read mahogany, not plood), and comes pretty well equipped with a 6CD, heated seats, and a giant moonroof.
It also has self-leveling rear shocks, and a water resistant cargo area that you can wipe clean with a wet rag.
My '98 is 9+ years old and has only been back to the dealer once, for a recall that didn't even affect my particular vehicle.
Comments
Len
Otherwise, it is perhaps a sensor malfunction.
I think the airbag warranty may be longer than the powertrain warranty, though I'm not certain.
-Brian
Putting warranty work off will do nothing but cost you more later.
-juice
So long as a person doesn't mind paying, and doesn't complain about it, nothing wrong with that! :P
Could this go away with break-in? Does the 2006 Forester have a drive by wire throttle and could that be the source of this sensitivity? It's like the system only likes zero throttle or accelerating throttle.
Ideas?
Love the car otherwise.
I think Subaru did it to obtain good EPA mileage numbers. Note that the 06 models' mileage dropped slightly, so I bet they went back to a more linear throttle.
-juice
If this is ateixeira's situation, they might benefit from a re-set, and have the computer learn all over again....
ateixeira, check with your owners manual or the dealer for how to do this.
It's a bit better now, but I still don't think the throttle is very linear.
-juice
1) Keep rpms low (between 2k and 3k).
2) Do not take your foot totally off the gas without pushing in the clutch at the same time. Do not pump the gas pedal at all (going from accelerate to decelerate).
3) Practice smooth driving by not tailgating, and anticipate red lights.
Note at highway speeds in 5th gear, these don't apply.
HTH
John
Len
thanks for all the inputs.
I've always had a stick shift, so I was really surprised at the buckin' bronco characteristic of the FXS 5-speed manual tranny. As you say, it seems very difficult to control the drive-by-wire throttle in order to engage gears smoothly. On other cars I have had the same challenge in getting a smooth ride but am more successful in avoiding the jerky engagement.
Surprise! I don't think the throttle is to blame. I'd say the AWD is at fault here. My feeling is that whatever controls the transfer of power to the wheels is free wheeling until you let up the clutch, then it grabs abruptly when the demand for traction is recognized - BUT - the AWD does not supply power simulatenously to both front and rear wheels. What I'm feeling by the seat of the pants is that the rear wheels are engaged first, then a split second later the front wheels are engaged. The bucking is caused because of the rear end "bumping" into the front end. Your natural reaction is to push the clutch in a little bit / let off the gas, then apply gas and clutch again. What usually happens is that the bucking cycle repeats. And repeats.
As you say - this happens only at slow speeds in specific scenarios. For my bumper-bumper traffic situation, avoiding this is just a matter of focusing on maintaining motion, not on maintaining a fixed distance behind the car in front (also means less brake wear!) It's a minor aggravation (a Subie quirk?) and should not detract from your overall enjoyment of your new Subie.
But, on a manual Forester, all power goes through the center hydraulic diffy, at roughly 50% per axle.
The bucking is simply a result of a lot of moving parts connected together. Whenever that happens, you can expect some unavoidable "slop" going from accelerate to deccelerate (not in the connections, mind you, but in the slight bending of the shafts/joints/gears etc that are in the loop). It is that "slop" that creates the bucking affect. The MT AWD transmits that slop directly to the engine whenever the clutch is engaged, and vice versa.
It is not too different from a motorcyle when you go on and off the gas. There is slop in the transmission between the engine and rear wheel, the result is the bike dives a bit and raises up a bit whenever the throttle goes from off to on, and vice versa.
John
-juice
Stick shifts in non-sports cars, I liken to a Horse. Nice sometimes, but rarely practical or useful.
I will have to remember that line next time someone mentions their AT going out at 110,000 miles.
Anyone EVER have a non-abuse MT problem? I don't even downshift through the gears on mine, so I bet the synchros are like new at 110,000.
I am not familiar with the Subie clutches, but I do not hear of very many early failures either.
John
I rarely hear of anyone wanting to keep a car past 80K, let alone 110,000 miles!! Most people prefer something new more often.
But my hat is off to anyone willing and able to squeeze 100K + and every last dollar out of their purchases. I just like that new car smell to much, I guess....
John
The Subie auto is actually pretty robust. It will likely outlast a clutch, though the clutch costs about a quarter as much to replace.
-juice
My subaru sucks and same kind of bearing problems and engine problems for 01 forester... less than 52 K on it
Next time I want to buy this car: :lemon:
ON MARCH 20, 2006, THE SYMMETRICAL ALL WHEEL DRIVE SYSTEM OF MY 2005 SUBARU FORRESTER XT FAILED, THE VEHICLE FISHTAILED AND DRIFTED, RESULTING IN A ROLLOVER, AND SEVERE BODILY INJURY. THE VEHICLE WAS SO FLIMSY, IT WAS DISGUSTING. EVERY DOOR AND WINDOW OPENING COLLAPSED, GLASS FLEW EVERYWHERE. THE CEILING COLLAPSED ON THE PASSENGERS' HEADS. THIS IS A DEATH CAR. *NM
It's sad that the car was destroyed and people were hurt - my heart goes out to them - but I've seen photos of Forester rollovers, and it would have had to have been at a pretty high rate of speed for the car to be destroyed like that. Not to mention that AWD isn't the same as traction control, and neither is going to prevent every type of accident. The bulk of that responsibility rests on the driver.
I digress...
And so what if he was high? Being high didn't make the car so damn flimsy! And imagine glass, flying everywhere, possibly hurting others, when he rolled it going 65 MPH. They just don't make quality glass these days!
:P
FORRESTER
We're expected to believe this person has owned one for 2 years or so and cannot SPELL Forester?
SYMMETRICAL ALL WHEEL DRIVE SYSTEM ...RESULTING IN A ROLLOVER
As if the driver behind the wheel had nothing to do with it.
Here's the real story. Some teenager took mom's Forester out for a joy ride, lost control, and then made up this story. They went to NHTSA because they figured documenting this bogus story would let them off easily with their parents for what was actually wreckless driving.
In actuality, this "DEATH CAR" is the IIHS' safest in class:
http://www.iihs.org/ratings/summary.aspx?class=58
-juice
Naw.
Some Attorney told them to do that, so he might get a fat check, his 40% of the damage settlement for shifting the blame from the driver to the car.
The problem with these NHTSA complaints is that anyone can enter them and they don't have to be verified.
Unless you notice a clear pattern of problems, you can't really call the data significant. With the CR-V engines fires, we saw dozens of reports, I think it was up to 60+ by the time all was said and done.
When I see a dozen roll overs, I'll be concerned.
-juice
<shamelss sarcasm>
Hey, you guys just don't get it! If there were no Foresters then no one would roll over in them. Shame on Subaru!
</shameless sarcasm>
tidester, host
His Forester rolled while on an off road trip. It was a '98 or '99, but it held up amazingly well. None of the glass broke at all. The passenger cell was completely intact. Of course he was traveling slowly at the time.
Not a stock suspension, plus most rollovers are "tripped", they don't just roll by themselves (Jeep Liberty excepted).
-juice
As far as I can tell, the Forester's closest competitor is the Tuscon, and it's not all that close. The Forester is becoming more and more like a vehicle without true competition. The question remains: is this good or bad?
CR-V is bigger but still no 3rd row. I think it's closest competitor will be the new Ford Edge.
Tucson slotted beneath the Santa Fe when that one grew, so it does compete with the Forester.
The Suzuki Grand Vitara is also just about Forester-sized.
The new Jeep Patriot even resembles the Forester, with its boxy green house. There's another.
Subaru has a difficult decision ahead of them. Do they stay in this class (which limits the prices they can charge) or move up in size along with most of the competition?
That might bump in to the Tribeca, though. Tough call.
-juice
That also makes it easier to allow for different activities for different members of the family. Say, my daughter and I want to go to the beach, and my husband and son want to play mini-golf - no problemo, we take our 2 cars and go wherever.
Although we find more and more often that children want us parents to go to the beach/mountains by ourselves and leave them in the house with pizza and computer games :mad:
Come to think of it, I spend 90% time alone in the car, about 8% time driving with someone in a passenger seat, and only 2% of time I have someone on the back seat.
If by chance we ever need a bigger 1 vehicle for the whole family to fit in, we'd simply rent a minivan.
I always thought of the Grand Vitara as being larger than the Forester, same for the Sportage, but I suppose that's not really true. Both of them sort of look bigger because they're more truck-like.
Speaking of size, now that the SX-4 is out the Forester is no longer the smallest SUV on the market.
Ok, you may consider the Forester a tall wagon, but it's not a tall hatchback.
I have the Miata for the times I'm alone, commuting and such. The Forester has become the family car. I'm very rarely along in there, only if it's snowing or if I'm going to Home Depot, and then it's loaded with payload anyway.
So for me, its replacement will likely have to be bigger. I'd say I'm alone in it about 10% of the time, alone with my wife 30%, and 60% of the time it's carrying the kids.
-juice
I like to drive a manual transmission. It's fun, gives me more road control and just is a better driving experiance. Besides, I find automatics generally boring to drive. I am researching small, AWD SUVs to find one that has lots of bells and whistles, is reliable, relatively fuel efficient, comfortable, and well built. Every year another manufacturer sends their MT small SUV the way of the Do Do bird. 2006 Toyota RAV4, followed by 2007 Honda CRV and 2007 Mitsubishi outlander. :mad:
What's a MT lover with the heart of a European driver to do ?? Anyway the Question is this: Is the 2006/2007 Forester
the little SUV I've been looking for to replace my aging RAV 4 with 5 speed manual. I thought so, but then I read the Edmunds consumer reviews on the 5 speed manual with the regular 166 HP engine and found that several people are complaining of occillating RPMs after cold start-up, hesitation, and jerkiness when trying to accelerate from low speed. What's up with that ? Does anyone have info on this? Is it really a problem or is it just a matter of the driver adjusting to the car ? :confuse:
Is the 2006/2007 Forester
the little SUV I've been looking for to replace my aging RAV 4 with 5 speed manual
I am about six weeks and 1400 miles into owning a new Forester/manual/base-engine. I am coming to this car from two manual xmsn cars that we still own: a Volvo S70 and a BMW 330ci. I've owned three BMW's, two Porsches, two Beetles, all with manuals, so I'm kinda biased toward the feel of the German shifters and transmissions. The volvo is barely acceptable compared to the BMW and the Forester. I have to say that the Forester has been a complete and pleasant surprise to me in how the shifter feels and shifts. It's very solid, I get reliable shifts, it's fairly short-throw, and I am completely satisfied. As to the oscillating RPM, I haven't seen that - but I have seen some jerkiness upon initial application of the throttle. I have adjusted some, but I suspect there may be some design issue, I recommend you check that out. It also could be that the turbo version would not exhibit this behavior. The rest of the Forester is just wonderful: perfect size - not too big, not too small, the quality seems excellent, I like the styling, it's a great little car. And by the way: I was looking at the 2007 CRV early reports, and when it became clear they were going to eliminate manual transmissions, the only thing left to consider in my opinion was the Forester and I have not been disappointed.
Gas mileage figures on five tanks so far: 24, 23, 29.5 (all highway), 26, and 25. I am a pokey driver so these are probably the best case you could expect. Regular gas!
It also has self-leveling rear shocks, and a water resistant cargo area that you can wipe clean with a wet rag.
My '98 is 9+ years old and has only been back to the dealer once, for a recall that didn't even affect my particular vehicle.
-juice
Owen