Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

2009 Subaru Forester mileage reports

24

Comments

  • sgloonsgloon Member Posts: 323
    The forester does "bounce" (for lack of a better term) a bit on rough pavement at the higher speeds. But, I know several other people on this forum have mentioned that "bounce" (I forget the term they used originally).

    I am a bit concerned about the "bounce" when the snow starts to fly. But, from the previous discussions about it, I took away that people thought it was the suspension, not the tires that were the cause of that feeling/vehicle movement. It has only been a few times, typically highway driving that I have experienced it. And so far, typically where there is a groove in the road...
  • pharmd718pharmd718 Member Posts: 78
    I was getting an average of 17mpg in my 2009 X-limited for the past few weeks. This was in 100% city driving (Brooklyn). I would usualy fill the gas tank at a HESS gas station close to work.

    I recently filled the tank at a gas station by my house (I only use 87 octane) and my mpg has jumped from 16.8-17.1 to over 20. I now have about 120 miles on the new tank and am showing an average of 21mpg.

    When I mentioned this to a friend at work, he stated that he filled his Infiniti 35X at the same HESS station and his check engine light came on and stayed on until he re-filled the tank at another station.

    Those of you who are getting an average of 17mpg in city driving, I strongly suggest trying a different gas station.

    p.s. Motor Trend SUV of the year award goes to 2009 subaru forester!!! :)
  • shogrenshogren Member Posts: 15
    My Forester has 1350 miles after a weekend trip. Drove 342 miles made up of approx 300 highway @ 70-72 MPH and balance city driving. Monitor had MPG of 25.8 and actual was 25.2.
  • tinycadontinycadon Member Posts: 287
    The poor gas mileage might be due to a switch over to winter gas, higher % ethanol mix? The other gas station might not have the new blend yet? Could be a reasonable explanation, or not?
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    That's pretty close. The trip computer in my van is dead-on accurate. Our Forester's is close, like yours.
  • gooch5gooch5 Member Posts: 14
    Would this be the Hess station on Crossbay Blvd in Queens? I was getting 18mpg in the street and about 23 on the highway on my previous tank of gas. After filling up at Hess I am now getting 14mpg in the street and 18 hwy.
    I am going to fill up at Exxon later. I'll report if any improvement.

    This is on an 09' XT Forester
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    We were getting about 28mpg for most of the current tank but it dipped to a little over 25mpg with the cold front that just came through. That plus short trips, and longer warm ups, lowered our average for the tank.
  • pharmd718pharmd718 Member Posts: 78
    gooch - Its a Hess station located in Brooklyn on Utica avenue. I guess Hess stations get their gas from the same supplier which would explain your bad mpg.
  • gooch5gooch5 Member Posts: 14
    I just came back from a long ride with my forester XT, I was getting 23mpg @ 70mph (cruise control) and the engine was running at about 2400 rpm's.
    I topped the tank off before I left and after 270 miles I am down to 1/4 tank.

    Now that my trip is reading 23.1mpg I am curious how long it will take to get it low after some street driving :)
  • noogman12noogman12 Member Posts: 2
    Could anyone comment on the RPM when going 60mph in 5th in a Manual Tran 2009 Forester? Also going 70 and 75mph? I just would like to get an idea of how high the engine revs going at highway speeds in 5th Geat. I know in the auto you are looking 3000rpm @70-75

    Thanks.
  • xwesxxwesx Member Posts: 16,762
    I am not sure on the Forester, by my manual Outback would run about 200 rpm higher than my auto at 70 mph.
    2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100, 1976 Ford F250
  • bigfrank3bigfrank3 Member Posts: 426
    Top gear RPM comparison by spreadsheet calculation:

    ------auto_manual
    60=2323_2418
    65=2517_2619
    70=2710_2820
    75=2904_3022
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Interesting that despite fewer ratios the auto is taller in overdrive.
  • bigfrank3bigfrank3 Member Posts: 426
    Even more so when you consider that the final drive in the auto is 4.44 and in the manual 4.11. The difference of course is because of the top gear ratio in the trans itself, 0.694 in the auto and 0.780 in the manual. This brings the effective ratio to 3.081 in the auto and 3.207 for the manual.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    That explains why we've seen as high as 33mpg in the trip computer with our auto.

    In real-world driving CR did much better in the manual, though, 25mpg vs. 22mpg for the slushbox.
  • gtscharggtscharg Member Posts: 5
    Live above 9,000 feet, drive mostly between 7500 and 11,000 feet, up some pretty steep highways (mountain passes, continental divide) and am seeing about 26 so far with 2500 miles.
  • occkingoccking Member Posts: 346
    I live more like 90 feet above sea level (near Providence, RI) Just turned 8000 miles (three months Wednesday have had the vehicle) avg mpg per computer 26.1. I will add up again actual usage & pretty sure mpg will come out to approx 25.5, but I will report back. Probably 2/3 - 3/4 highway driving, most of the rest "suburban" Have regular aspirated 4, not the turbo.
  • occkingoccking Member Posts: 346
    To anyone interested.... Just yesterday, turned 10,000 miles since getting 09 Forster non turbo.

    I have not reset the computer since getting vehicle and mpg showed 26.4
    Based on miles drive, divided by actual fuel usage, actual mog came out to 26.2.

    This, this is the most accurate computer I have had in a car (with respect to showing accurage mpg info)

    On my last four fill ups, here is what the computer showed vs actual:

    computer 28.5 actual 28.9 (a record)
    computer 28.2 actual 28.0
    computer 26.7 actual 26.7
    computer 26.7 actual 25.9
    computer 28.8 actual 28.5

    As my driving habits don't change (obviously quite a bit of highway driving) the mpg has been creeping up as I put on more mileage.

    That being said, I am not "thrilled" with the ride on the vehicle. Too many squeeks and rattles, can't really pinpoint them, just a noisy car. Although I have premium radio you can't balance the front and rear very well, if you do the rear not very "potent" I am concerned I will not get huge mileage out of the tires -- already they show some wear. My left leg keeps hitting the side panel on the door, uncomfortable on long trips. Also, very cheap carpeting on floor (if you want to even call it carpeting) Nothing like carpeting you find in most other cars Lastly, the bluetooth although it works ok people on the other end cannot understand me that well.

    On the positive side, love the large sunroof & much more "glass" area than with previous cars -- makes it nice and bright on inside (except that it is more difficult to read the nav, too much glare) I like to travel a lot with roof open so spend $90 or so (used Subaru Bucks) on air deflector. It is slightly "ugly" and much larger than one on previous vehicles but, it really cuts down on wind noise at highway speeds (so I can still talk on phone)
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    That was quick....

    Interesting that your actual mileage was higher than the trip computer on that one occasion.
  • occkingoccking Member Posts: 346
    That's happened a few times where actual was over computer. However, I do keep very good records every time I fill up (have done so for last 35 years. Even record the temperature!

    Since my last report at around 10,000 miles, have put on another 2500 miles or so. The trip computer, since I reset it at that mark now reads 25.8 mpg, but on the several fill ups as high as 27.9 or so, as low as 24 or so.

    I do notice as If I do a lot of driving at 70 mph, the mpg certainly drops a bit. Ideal on the highway seems to be 55 - 60 but difficult to drive at that slow speed.

    One more comment, and you will get a kick out of this. Much better mpg going downhill. Seriously, I make a lot of trips up into Maine, Montreal, NY State. If I go "uphill" (per the map my mpg is not as good as coming home "downhill on the map" Maybe you could offer an explanation. One, is that when I come from from a trip that tends to be later in the day, or early evening. When I leave on a trip tends to be early morning. The temperature doesn't differ all that much, and traffic not an issue. So, why the difference????
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Could it be that the engine is already warm?

    The engine is least efficient when it first warms up.

    That shouldn't made a big difference on a full tank, though, just short-term.
  • tinycadontinycadon Member Posts: 287
    I had to re-read this a few times to make sure I wasn't mis-reading it, GRAVITY, that's why you have better mpg going downhill than uphill, it's the simple laws of physics. Your engine doesn't have to work as hard to maintain speed going downhill than uphill, get on a bike, see how hard it is to pedal down a hill than to pedal back up the same hill. :sick:
  • occkingoccking Member Posts: 346
    I have no explanation, as we are talking about hours of driving, not a few minutes. Same roads over an over. If I drive from Providence, RI to say, Albany, NY and get x amount of mpg in the morning, then a few days later coming home, after filling up get more coming home, No difference in traffic one way or the other, same speed, so the only explanation I can come up with is "downhill" coming home (per the map)
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Yeah, even if RPMs are the same, going uphill the ECU with fun a richer mix of fuel to overcome the extra weight it's pulling. Downhill it will do the opposite - lean out the mix for better mileage.

    Toyota does that well - my Sienna gets excellent mileage going down hills, as if the gas were shut off completely. Amazing - the trip computer pegs at 99mpg very easily even with a slight downhill.
  • occkingoccking Member Posts: 346
    I understand what you are saying, but, I thought the world was "round" So, even though north is "up" on a map and south is "down" do you really think gravity would be a factor?

    Now, there is on factor real world I am aware of you, you would not be unless you live in this area.

    There is a stretch in the Mass Pike, just west of Westfield, MA that is six miles long going towards Albany, I believe the elevation goes from around 400' to around 1600' so I realize over that stretch the average mpg will certainly drop a bit. As you get further west the elevation eventually climbs to 2100 at the peak 10 miles later. In fact, there is a sign on the Mass Pike highest elevation on Route 90 west of So Dakota.

    At any rate, even factoring that in (of couse, on way home I get the mpg advantage) for other trips coming home I still get better mileage.
  • robm2robm2 Member Posts: 53
    2009 Forester XT, 10000 miles

    Probably getting an average of 21 MPG, (combined city/highway). Highway average more around 25 MPG, and City average more around 19-20 MPG.

    Probably could do a lot better if we stayed out out turbo... naaah, too much fun!!

    Rob
  • tinycadontinycadon Member Posts: 287
    Direction has nothing to do with it, change in elevation is what matters. If you have your cruise control on, and you climb a steep grade, your car will drop a gear and boost the rpms to keep you going at a steady speed, which will drop your mpgs, no? And if you are in c.c. and going downgrade, the car won't need to drop a gear, it can stay in overdrive. I guess that's the best I can explain my theory, but I can't see any other reason for a difference in mpgs than that? :confuse:
  • occkingoccking Member Posts: 346
    I'm sort of joking with everyone here. I hope you don't believe I seriously think that whether I go "up" or "down" on the map that is really makes any difference on mpg. I am well aware of what a long, steep upgrade will do for average mpg. When I hit that long hill on the Mass Turnpike, my mpg on computer as as actual consumption will change.

    Quite often if I leave my home early am with a full tank, by the time I get to the beginning of the hill, my computer read out may say, for example, "25.8 mpg" At the top of that hill, 6miles later it probably will drop to 25.2, or maybe even 24.9. If I hit that same point with, say, 350 miles, it might only drop .3 mpg (everyone has probably notice the changes take place in increments of .3 mog.

    Conversely, when I return home going down that long stretch will increase the mpg on the computer by the same amount.

    May times I fill up in Lee, MA (just over the NY border to save on the cost, as gas in NY usually at least 10 cents gallon more than right over the border in MA) then go only 20 miles or so than down that steep hill, mpg may increase from 28 to as high as 30. Of course that is meaningless as 20 miles at average highway speeds and 6 miles down the long stretch with little strain on the motor.

    But, still, and I have made this calculation over several years with different vehicles, going "south" seems to give better mpg than going "north"
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    The funny thing is usually the wind blows north by northeast.
  • 26cars26cars Member Posts: 19
    Have a 2010 Forester 2.5X Premium, just hit 2200 miles, averaging 24 mixed driving, best highway so far 27.9
    An interesting note: I have Thule racks with kayak pads on them and the added wind resistance dropped overall mileage by about 1.5 mpg (#'s above are with the racks).
    I am a first-time Subie owner and so far really like the vehicle; I also tow a small boat and a teardrop camper with it (not at same time :) and it handles them with ease (each is about 1,000 lbs loaded). I've also owned Honda's (3), Mazda's (2) and a slew of American stuff- I plan on driving this baby 200K miles and based on what I've found researching and heard from folks, it appears this is very doable for this vehicle. Planning a trip to Maine with the camper this week and will report back what the mileage is while towing in hilly terrain, hoping for at least 22 or better.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    It may drop more than that.

    On my 1998 Forester I tracked every tank for mileage, and my average was 25.1 mpg but I got just 17.9 mpg while towing about 1500 lbs.

    The penalty is pretty big. It's a light vehicle so a tow rig affects the overall % of weight a lot.
  • 26cars26cars Member Posts: 19
    Yep, that makes sense. I'm so used to a heavy SUV with a V8 that this "light vehicle" thing is totally foreign to me. Thankfully towing is only a very occaisional thing.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Yeah, a Suburban probably barely noticed the extra 20% of its own weight. For a Forester it's nearly 50% extra.
  • 26cars26cars Member Posts: 19
    Just returned from my camping/kayaking trip to Maine- the Forester averaged 22.8 mpg (actual, not by computer) mostly highway with some hilly terrain. Not all of it was towing (teardrop camper @ 800 lbs.) but when not towing still had the Yaks on roof (about 100 lbs. plus the racks). Overall I am very pleased! The tranny does hunt gears a bit on steep hills but not overly objectionable. I do think that the 2400 lb. rating (per Subaru) is maybe a bit optimistic for this vehicle, however.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Not bad at all on the mileage. Better than I expected.
  • occkingoccking Member Posts: 346
    Today, exactly 6 months on my 09 limited. Right now have 15,500 miles. The trip computer I did not reset for the first 10,000 miles, and it showed 26.4. Since resetting shows exactly the same 26.4 mpg. I believe my actual mpg for the first 10,000 miles really did average slightly over 26 mpg, based on consumption so probably similar this time.

    I have gotten as high as 28 actual on a long trip, lowest I have ever gotten was around 21, but that was for a lot of "puttering around" short stuff here and there.

    I still am skeptical of others out there who claim to be getting 30+ mpg. I have been able to achieve that on the trip computer on a long trip, but just a few miles of non-highway stuff brings it right down to 28 or so.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Put it in cruise at 55mph, and you'll break 30. More with a 5 speed manual.

    Problem is, it takes a lot of patience to get wherever you're going! :D
  • occkingoccking Member Posts: 346
    Oh, I am sure if I did a lot of steady highway driving at 55 mph I would probably get close to, or even over 30 mpg. I am not a real fast driver but I do notice the difference, I get real good mpg when I keep it in the low 60's but certainly when I get over 65, even to 70 the mpg certainly will drop.
  • gabe1475gabe1475 Member Posts: 2
    We just got out 2.5x with 5spd manual and could not be happier with it. On the way home I got 31.2mpg and I was crusing at 73mph. Keep in mind we are in AZ so there are no inclines to deal with. Driving around town my wife is now getting about 26mpg the first two weeks, again not so much stop and go as you can typically get to 5th gear (even with the speed limints at 40-45) assuming you don't get a red light and lights are not very often here. I can hardly wait for our first trip to Payson or Flagstaf to see how we do with all Highway driving and how well the AWD holds up. Will post more as we get some more miles under the belt and see if the MPG increases.

    As a pointer to those who say that these MPG can not be achieved, I find what helps most is upshifting at 2k RPM when there are no other cars behind me other than that I usually push the car just a bit further. You loose some acceleration, but the gain is made on the efficiency.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Just don't lug the engine.

    If you're carrying a big payload or going uphill, I'd give it a bit more revs.

    You did say the roads were flat, though...
  • howellhaushowellhaus Member Posts: 3
    We have an '03 XTS and after I switched to the Goodyear Assurance tire (not the fuel miser, the one that's supposedly quieter), I began hitting 30 mpg pretty consistently with a high of 31.3 mpg. It was 24-27 range before these tires. It's got 115K miles on it and running like a top, although I keep smelling antifreeze and not seeing anything and my levels stay good...?
  • xwesxxwesx Member Posts: 16,762
    Are those the Assurance Comfortred?

    As for the antifreeze, check around the water pump to see if there is any staining. It doesn't take much coolant to smell it, and small amounts will more often evaporate (and leave a residue) than drip, especially when in contact with hot engine components.
    2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100, 1976 Ford F250
  • howellhaushowellhaus Member Posts: 3
    Yes, they are the ComforTred tires. I would love to have bought Fuel Max', but also needed the quietest tires I could find as I travel frequently and discuss business during my travels, by cell. I mentioned during an oil service that I didn't think the tires are all that quiet and the mechanic seems to think I have an outboard bearing that's whining. $200 a wheel for parts and similar labor. I really wonder, especially since the car's mileage has improved so much with these tires. I really thought that noise was the tires before too... who'd have known ?

    I'll check the waterpump, if I can find it. These little things are really packed in there. It makes sense to replace it when I take it in for the timing belts. Car's at 115K and I still haven't done that service... oops !
  • xwesxxwesx Member Posts: 16,762
    It should be easy enough to find - just follow the lower radiator hose (on driver side of vehicle, in the front, on the bottom) back to where it connects to the thermostat housing - the water pump is directly above that.

    I considered putting ComforTred on my Caravan, but they were quite a bit more per tire than the Allegra I ended up putting on there, were not available locally, and I was in a time crunch. I had prior experience with the Allegra and know it to be a smooth-riding, long lasting tire that is also very capable in inclement weather; all of those are important factors for me. For $73 a tire (locally in Fairbanks, AK), they really are a bargain!
    2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100, 1976 Ford F250
  • ecotrklvrecotrklvr Member Posts: 519
    Antifreeze vapor could be getting past one of the gaskets in the radiator cap. The smaller one in the center holds pressure in the radiator; the larger one keeps the liquid (and vapor) ion the system when antifreeze flows from radiator to overflow tank (when hot), and back again (when engine & radiator cool down). When engine and radiator are cold, remove the cap and check both gaskets.
  • howellhaushowellhaus Member Posts: 3
    How about blown head gasket...? Had it in to Gary's Subaru in West Eugene. $2000 later I've had three error codes fixed, replaced the head gaskets (both), water pump, all belts including the timing belts (overdue), O2 sensor, removed heat shields (rattling like the dickens) and the left rear wheel bearing. Funny thing is, the radiator hoses are still original and working fine...?
  • ecotrklvrecotrklvr Member Posts: 519
    For you to smell the antifreeze under the hood, it has to be leaking into that area. More likely it's a leak of a loose hose clamp, bad gasket in radiator cap, overflow canister lid/gasket, thermostat housing gasket; something more benign than head gasket.
  • pmoffnsfpmoffnsf Member Posts: 3
    I was wondering if anyone else is getting on average about 12-13 miles to the gallon in the city? I live in San Francisco and one of the reasons I bought my 09 Forrester was the city mileage. While I knew I wouldn't get the 20 something on the sticker I was hoping for 15-16.
  • billwvbillwv Member Posts: 48
    "I was wondering if anyone else is getting on average about 12-13 miles to the gallon in the city? I live in San Francisco and one of the reasons I bought my 09 Forrester was the city mileage."

    That sounds really bad. I live in WV and while not city driving, I drive mostly up and down hills with virtually no interstate driving. Over the last year my readout shows 21.9, which is about what I expected.

    Unless you are sitting in traffic for hours, I would think you should do better.
    Much has to do with how much driving you do with a cold engine versus a fully warmed engine -- short trips really hurt mpg.

    Hopefully others will respond, but I would have it checked.

    Bill
  • johnvjohnv Member Posts: 40
    Do you drive Lombard to work both ways? I'm on the other side of the bay in an 08 manual and the worst mileage I've seen is just below 20mpg. I average ~25mpg and come close to 29 on tanks where I've come down the 80 from the mountains.

    They say the car gets better mileage after being broken in, but 13 is ridiculous unless you're driving hills constantly or just sitting in traffic. SF is a hilly city -- if you just drove from Diamond Heights down to the Castro or Balboa Park I could imagine your mpg being really bad.
This discussion has been closed.