Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Considering purchasing first Outback
I’m trying to decide between purchasing a used Forester or Outback but am leaning towards the latter. I will put 6,000-7,000 miles a year on this vehicle, with about 1/4 of those being off-road, driving around pastures in Texas (no mountains, etc.). Initially, I thought that I would buy a truck but don’t really need the hauling capabilities and, of course, no truck rides nearly as well as a Subaru. To me, the Forester and Outback drive equally well but my research indicates that the Outback has better air-conditioning which, in Texas, is important. While it would be nice to have such safety features as a back-up camera, that's not essential, and I don't care about things like leather seats, etc. If possible, I would like a vehicle with less than 100,000 miles and not spend more than $20,000. Would it be advisable to lower the maximum acceptable mileage to, say, 80,000? Of course, I know that there's a tradeoff between mileage and price. Do any model years for Outback stand out as especially good or bad between, say, 2010-2018? For instance, I've seen one discussion indicating that pre-2016 Foresters may tend to burn oil so I'm curious if anyone would put up a similar "red flag" for any Outback models? I would greatly appreciate thoughts regarding this question from anyone on this board. Thanks very much.
Tagged:
0
Comments
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and let us know! Post a pic of your new purchase or lease!
MODERATOR
2015 Subaru Outback 3.6R / 2014 MINI Countryman S ALL4
With full disclosure, I have six Subarus under my belt at this point (three Forester, three Outback), so do have biases....
If your off road excursions are limited to fairly mellow terrain, both models can likely handle it equally well. Both have around 8-1/2" of clearance, though the Forester's approach and departure angles are better. If you must deal with any ruts, or small stream crossings, that may play a role. In my experience, the Outback loves to catch its bumper shells on things - it just has very long overhangs. You can help protect the rear shell by installing a Class III hitch - you lose some of your departure angle, but when you drag, you drag a heavy piece of steel instead of a fragile piece of plastic. Tires matter in off road: Stock wheels on the Outback are 17 - 18" with a 5x114.5 bolt pattern (beginning 2015 - prior was 5x100); wheels on the Forester are 16-17" with a 5x100 bolt pattern. Forester will accept a 15" wheel; Outback is, I believe, limited to a minimum size of 16" due to larger rotors. With regular off-roading, tires with robust sidewalls will serve you well (e.g., not the tires that are normally put on these cars!).
On purchase price, the Forester will win. I would expect that, all things being equal (miles, condition, trim level, etc), Outback will likely run about 20% more than Forester. Total cargo space in the Outback is more, but with a lower roof line (e.g., you can fit slightly taller items into the Forester).
Regarding oil consumption, the early years of the FB25 engine often had an issue... Mine was one of them! However, this was not limited to the Forester, but all FB25 blocks between initial introduction (2010 MY for Outback, 2011 MY for Forester) and some time in 2014 were potentially subject to the problem. There was a class-action lawsuit whose settlement included an extended warranty for this issue and free short-block replacement if it manifests - regardless of your position within the ownership chain. I believe the thresholds on that was 100,000 miles or 10 years (whichever occurs first). The correction for my car was done two years ago, and I have no oil consumption issues now. Before, it ate a lot of oil! Since this issue is difficult to notice (does not involve leaks) without time, I will also say that it was worse when the vehicle was under load than under easy-going driving. For example, pulling steep hills on the freeway during a trip, I had to add a whole quart after just one tank (around 300 miles) of fuel. Other times, I could to 800-1000 miles on a quart of oil. As such, if you're worried about it, you could check the oil (making sure it is at the top of the safe mark) take an extended test drive (50-100 miles) and work it hard, then let it sit before checking the oil level again. Most likely, if it has the issue, you will see a noticeable drop. Any repair of this condition should show up on Carfax, and you may also be able to discover it through Subaru if you have the VIN.
Subaru moved to the CVT for its automatic transmission in 2014 for both models. Prior to that they used the "4EAT."
Personally, I hate the look of the 2010-14 Outback, so I can't recommend that car over any other option (2009-13 Forester, 2014+ Forester, or 2015+ Outback) for that reason alone. The SH Forester (09-13) is my favorite generation for several reasons, and, if you can find a 2011-13 example with a good history and 70-80K miles (price should be likely around $11-12K) I would say "go for it!" The price will creep up significantly for the Outback in 2015+, and it comes up steadily in forester in 2014+.
In my opinion, read up on the oil consumption class action settlement to confirm the thresholds, then go with what you feel is best for you in terms of balancing age, price, and miles. I would look for lower mileage examples the older the model year, and higher mileage examples the newer the model year. I tend to drive my vehicles to at least 100,000 miles (often quite a lot more than that), so I am not worried about 60/70/80K or more at purchase as long as I am comfortable with the history of the vehicle.
Good luck!
So far, I’ve only searched for vehicles on Carmax, as well as Edmunds. Both sites, of course, list the VIN, so I can track down those repair histories that you suggested. Using all of my (admittedly extensive) filters, Edmunds lists 5 Foresters within your favorite model year parameters, ranging in price from $13K-$18K and mileage from 50K-86K. Plus, all are at least 700 miles away so I assume that I’d incur hefty shipping fees. All of Carmax’s Foresters are later than your favorite model year parameters. And, perusing both sites confirms your assertion about relative prices, all things being equal.
Again, I cannot thank you enough for taking the time to share your knowledge about this.
While this is an awkward time to fly, I have purchased many vehicles between 2,500 and 5,500 miles away. If you can get a good deal on a ticket, it is usually not that expensive to do this option (versus shipping). However, shipping is also not usually too insane. @qbrozen might be able to share the cost he incurred on a recent long-distance shipping; I think you will incur between $1,000 and $2,000 for a shipment anywhere in the contiguous US, though price can vary depending on open versus closed shipping (among other factors).
As for the lug pattern comment, that was only to create awareness that the two models have different patterns, in case you have a preference due to available wheels that you might want to use on it, etc. From a practical perspective, it doesn't really matter.
Regarding tires, availability depends a lot on whether you want to use stock rim size or a smaller diameter option. On Forester, for example, you cannot get any "all terrain" tire unless you have a max rim diameter of 16". The base model comes with 16" rims; otherwise, the factory size is 17" and you would need to get a smaller rim (as small as 15"). For Outback, there are some options at 17" (the default factory size for basic and premium levels), but not for larger rims (18/19"). Yokohama Geolandar G015, Cooper Discoverer, Toyo Open Country, Falken Wildpeak... all of these are a good mix of road manners with regular light trail duty. You could go more committed to the off-road life and get something like the BF Goodrich K02, but it is overkill. The idea is to have tires that can handle the terrain - especially when wet - and not need to worry about puncturing sidewall quite so much.
From a traction perspective, Michelin makes some very good tires. However, from a longevity perspective, I am not a fan of Michelin - I find that the material deteriorates faster on that brand than any other (that I've tried). On my daily drivers, I will typically use tires anywhere from four to seven years. In that timeframe, Michelin is the only brand that that regularly shows significant signs of age stress (small cracks in the sidewall and/or between tread blocks). Add that to the typically higher-than-average price, it doesn't add up to a good buy for me. While I have not replaced a set of Michelins "early" due to that factor, I also don't live in a high-heat climate with high-speed driving like Texas. If I did, I think I would be nervous to drive on "aging" Michelins (e.g., more than about four or five years old).
As far as one brand being overall better or worse than another, I try to withhold judgement based on experience with a particular model. There are some models of every brand that I would probably hate, and others about which I would gush. I cannot stand the the Yokohama Geolandar G95 tire that was OEM on Forester for many, many years, yet they also make the G51v winter tire that is honestly one of the best all-around winter tires out there.
Tirerack tends to have a good analysis section on ownership experiences. I like to read through reviews to get a good idea of whether my own expectations are likely to be met. So far, I haven't been disappointed.
A few corrections:
1) Outback moved to FB25 in 2013, not 2011.
2) Outback 2.5 moved to CVT in 2010, Outback 3.6 moved to CVT in 2015.
3) 2014-2019 Forester XT (all) and 2.5i (Touring only) have 18" wheels.
To add:
1) Beware of head gasket issues with the EJ25 (predecessor to FB25).
2) I have BFG Advantage T/A Sport on my 2015 Forester 2.5i Touring. They have a fairly aggressive tread for a touring all-season tire.
Beautiful--and yellow, a rare color! Taking your advice, I'm "bird-dogging" info on that class action suit. Apparently, it concerned the 2011-2014 Forester and 2013 Outback which, of course, is not to say that other Outback years didn't have the problem. Most pertinent aspect for a prospective owner was that it increased the warranty length from 5 years /60,000 miles to 8 years /100,000 miles. So far (links below), I can't find anything that it includes everyone in the chain of ownership but seems that it would.
https://jalopnik.com/subaru-settles-lawsuit-over-oil-burning-cars-1752805682
https://www.torquenews.com/1084/update-subaru-oil-consumption-class-action-lawsuit.
Dukey,
Per your request, attached are two shots of "Old Blue" from different angles.
As for the settlement warranty... it does cover any owner. I am the third owner of our 2013 Forester (purchased at 50,000 miles), and I had no issues at all with coverage.
We had an extended warranty through Subaru on our 2010 Forester (it was the 7/100 zero deductible), and not only did it save us substantial money on that car over the ownership period, but it was seamless to use ANYWHERE. Once, we were on a transcontinental trek (we drove about 12,500 miles over five weeks), and the car developed an oil leak while near the east coast. By the time we were on the west coast a few days later, it was leaking at an alarming rate (like a quart of oil or more per fuel stop). We had a stop for a few days of visiting, so I contacted all the dealers in the area to find one that was willing to take us in on short notice due to the emergency nature of the situation. A few hours later, they had us fixed up and ready to go... total bill was nearly $3,000, of which I owed only $79 for the price of a timing belt (which was an optional authorization on my part). In the end, we were only slightly inconvenienced and not delayed at all in terms of the total trip schedule.
I bought our warranty from Mastra Subaru in Massachusetts, as they (at least at that time) would sell the top tier warranty for "cost", which was less than half of the price at my local dealership (where they only sell at full retail). IIRC, retail was about $3,400 at that time, while cost was $1,500.
Third party / aftermarket warranties can offer some protection, but they can also be highly restrictive. For example, I had one friend who paid a fairly hefty price for an aftermarket warranty, and she needed to use it three times. Of those three times, twice she was fully denied coverage, and the third time she had to fight them tooth and nail, including hiring a lawyer, to get them to cover the claim. Of course, that was the third of three times, so she was quite fed up with the run around at that point (which is why she went to a lawyer). Another friend had an engine failure in a WRX STi, which was over $10,000 for repair, and her aftermarket warranty did cover it (though the delays and documentation requirements were intense).
Dealer warranties can be fine (I have not heard bad things about the Carmax warranty, for example), but it all depends on the terms and the dealer network. For single location warranties, I would find those next to useless because it would tie me to the dealer (in terms of proximity) for any needed claims. For others, they would never notice the tether.
The advantage to the CPO vehicles is the inclusion of basically the extended warranty, however, you're going to pay for that (and then some, in most cases) within the purchase price. Personally, I have never purchased a CPO vehicle as I do shop heavily on price, and the market has not lacked quality vehicles from other sources (in my experience).
After running myself ragged with Outback research, I am back to considering Foresters. Unless it was a phenomenal deal, I just can't justify spending the extra money on an Outback that will be parked outdoors and get 25-30% of its miles off-road. So, while considering a range of MY, I'm going to pay special attention to any in that 2011-13 range with a good history (including the class action-mandated engine repair, of course). I test drove the Outback at the Hyundai dealer (he won't come down off the stated price) and liked it EXCEPT for the gear shifting paddles and the lane change alert. Maybe the latter can be overridden but the paddles were a nuisance, although I know some people like that option. The Subaru salesman has suggested Crossteks, which I just now am investigating. Preliminarily, I can't see that much of a price difference from Foresters. So, unless that proves to be wrong, I'll stick with Foresters. They're 5" higher and, I suspect have more headroom (I'm 6'1"). Plus, Forester has a longer history and I'm not wild about the Crosstrek "fastback" look (although it's fine on my Cutlass!).
It is actually funny how refined I felt our 2010 Forester was when we first tested and bought it. At the time, we were driving a 1998 Dodge Grand Caravan and Ford Escort. However, now my vehicle is an Audi Q7, so when I do drive the Forester, it feels a little rustic to my pampered backside! I still enjoy driving it, but it doesn't have that quiet, refined feel I once thought it did.
Perspective is one helluva thing.
You had me pondering the log house comment... I thought... "I don't have a log house...?" Then I realized what was in the background of the C20 photo... I was helping a folk school move their operations to that facility, which is located at a park here in Fairbanks (Pioneer Park, run by the local government). It is a historic cabin that is around 120 years old.
If it makes you feel any better about the Outback.... I am having battery issues with my Audi Q7, and I could not get it to start this morning at nearly -20F (even though I had the battery charged up and plugged in the vehicle's engine heaters for a couple hours prior to attempting to start). So, it looks like I am going to need to pull the battery tonight and get it swapped for a new one (less than year old).
Also, when I bought the 2013 Forester in Illinois back in 2017, it's battery was dead when we arrived at the dealer. However, since that day, no further battery issues.
For the Q7 issue, I think it's the car's "smart charging" technology that is leading the batteries to premature deaths. The car is seven years old and is now working on it's fourth battery... unacceptable! In looking at it closely last night, I noticed that there is some sort of a sensor or electronic doo-dad in line with the negative battery terminal. If I unplugged the sensor, the battery was receiving full voltage with the car running (13.75V). If I plugged it in, the battery voltage was only 13.2V. So, since I know that "correct" is bad for the battery, I just left the unit unplugged and will see how the battery ages now. I strongly suspect that it will fare much better!