Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Comments
-mike
remember, the Forester does have quite the cargo area for it's size. but, I agree, tweak the interior a bit to give those in the back a bit more leg room. just don't super-size it - it's not necessary.
-Brian
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
BTW, I didn't say the next Forester was going to be Excursion-size, only that if the current super-sizing fad continues that it will "eventually" grow that large. Of course your Trooper is already well on it's the way :-)
-Frank P.
Actually I'd like my Trooper to be about 8"-9" longer, and 8" wider and put a small V8 DOHC in there. It would then be perfect.
-mike
Ross
I completely agree. Not everyone needs a big vehicle and the Forester suits a lot of needs short of a big family.
It's become almost of a cliche with new model turns. They always are bigger, get more power and have more cupholders.
Ken
It is interesting that the only other vehicle I considered was the 2 door Cherokee, until I drove it. It was old, crude, and I had no place for my left foot. Outside of that it was perfect.
Regards,
this Frank
Actually, I bought the Forester in spite of the fact that it had 4 doors. My first preference was a 2000 version of my 5-MT 2-door 4x4 4.0L Cherokee. Only after it became apparent that this particular model was impossible to get (after trying for 7 months) did I expand my search. Of course it only took a brief test drive to convince me that the Forester was the way to go as its handling and ride were light years ahead of the Cherokee's!
-Frank P.
-Frank P.
The current Forester has acceptable torque but could stand an additional 20-25 hp. The WRX drivetrain would not supply the necessary torque curve for those who haul or tow - someone from a non-North American market please rebut me if I'm mistaken. Legacy owners will need the towing/hauling torque which the H-6 apparently provides. If the H-6 shows up in the GT it should be tuned to pick up a few more hp than the same engine in the Outback series, as befits its more sporting character.
Okay, no use beating a dead horse.
Ed
My dream Forester would be a 2-door version of the existing model with the rear strut towers moved to increase the rear seat room and a light-pressure turbo putting out 190-200 HP offered as an option for the existing 2.5L H-4. It would run circles around every other vehicle in its class! Okay, I'll wake-up now :-(
-Frank P.
At the same time, though, I wonder if there might be enough of a U.S. market for both the current compact Forester (perhaps borrowing that Canadian "Forester Sport" label) alongside a bigger, more upscale Forester (the old "Grand Forester" theory, though I'd hope for a better name). The Impreza-based "Forester Sport" could be the entry-level and maybe more performance-oriented (with a turbo option, maybe) vehicle, while the Legacy-based "Grand Forester" (with H6, perhaps) could attract buyers who might otherwise feel obliged to buy the bigger competing SUVs, such as the Highlander or, God forbid, the Explorer.
Finally, I also agree that an H6 Legacy GT would be a great sports sedan, and one that would attract a broader market of shoppers than the current H4 -- and might even have greater appeal to most American drivers than a twin-turbo version.
But another option might be to offer both a twin-turbo H4 Legacy GT and an H6 Outback Sedan, which could provide a little more market differentiation between the vehicles, especially for the Outback Sedan. I'd also like to see one or both offered with a VDC option. But I think that'd really need to be done at a much more reasonable price than you now have fork over for an Outback VDC.
What I'm hoping will happen is that the '03 Forester will get a similar rear seating arrangement that is now found on the new Rav4, and the about to be released new CRV. By that I mean:
• A split rear seat that can be moved fore and aft—just like your front seat. And...
• A reclining backrest.
Offering those features will make a world of difference in rear seat room and comfort. BTW, the new Rav4, actually has a shorter wheelbase than the Forester, yet it has more rear seat legroom, and is more comfortable—because of those just mentioned features.
Bob
I really hope GM doesn't gain influence over Subaru. They have already manged to ruin Saab. First, even though Saab had the 900 replacement (now called the 9-3) partially designed, GM insisted that Saab use existing GM of Europe parts. Saab engineers were not satisfied with either Opel platform, so they decided to take components from both. Unfortunately, after the new design was out, Opel decide to abandon one of the platforms, leaving the Saab design an orphan. Thus, there was no particular cost advantage in having used it.
Worse, using that platform resulted in the new car being smaller than the old, with a crapmed driving position and 6 inches less cargo space in the hatch. Plus, the cargo floor is no longer flat and the speaker mounts interefere with loading. The marque has gone upscale, with Lexus-like pricing and service costs. And the company has not introduced all wheel drive, in spite of customer requests.
That is why I bought a Forester. It has the flat load floor and more room for the driver, plus AWD. Remeber that GM is the company of Alfred P. Sloan, whose famous quote is: "What's good for General Motors is good for the USA." In other words, we will tell you what you want and you will buy it.
As for Ford, I don't know what possessed them to make the Explorer larger. They already had the largest SUV in the world in their lineup, so why did they need another monster?
It looks like a segment buster for drivers who wan't a pick up that doesn't handle like a pick up. I doubt it will come cheap though.
Needless to say, it's a much anticipated new vehicle. I just hope Subaru gives it a bit more capability (towing & payload) than what's currently available in the Outback and Forester.
Bob
1.
The brat ( ST-X ) has higher ground clearance than
other trucks.
2.
The only car-based truck
3.
Very nice reviews already about it already.
4.
the bed can expand unbelievably.
5.
check out at http://www.subaru.com/st-x
6.
this will be another WRX type hit for Subaru.
-mike
Take a look at a picture of the Brat with its doors opened- the window pillars are metal and are one piece with the doors themselves. This thing is designed to take a beating.
But isn't the front overhand a bit long, making the angle of approach quite low?
Also, a Subaru pickup concept is to be shown: Hmmm... I wonder if it will be a close-to-production version of the BRAT, or just the same concept ST-X that was shown at LA two years ago?
http://www.autonewseurope.com/2001frankfurt/subaru910.htm
Bob
Bob
Dennis
Stephen
Bob
http://i-club.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=90638
Don't blink, you might miss it. :-)
Dennis
-Colin
I do hope that all the cars get that new grill though, its so much nicer and gets rid of those funky 2 little things between the lights and the grill.
I am not very impressed with looks
..Mike
..Mike
The new Lamborghini Murciélago:
http://dieburger.com/News24/Wheels24/0,3999,2-15_1078115,00.html
Four wheel drive and a dry sump to lower center of gravity. Well, Subaru has known that for many years, reducing center of gravity through engine design and the benefits of AWD.
Daniel
PS. The article is from South Africa, so word usage and spelling may seem foreign.
Bob
http://www.subaru.co.jp/impreza/sportswagon/index.html
Bob
http://www.autonewseurope.com/2001frankfurt/index.html
http://www.veh-tech.net/
Bob
The amount of pressure on Subaru is becoming hard to believe. Everyone will soon have AWD wagons, a niche basically owned by Subaru until a few years ago. They really have their work cut out for them. These niches were left alone for years, but now the giant mainstream companies are joining the party, and they have deep pockets.
I like the WRX as it is: quirky and controversial. Imagine the opposite - plain and boring.
The wife got a $50 offer to drive a big Buick, so we asked to drive a Rendezvous instead (had to drive something). For the most part I wasn't impressed.
The V6 is coarse, slow, and not efficient either. The 3rd seat works, but leaves no cargo room at all. The driver's seat was uncomfy, and the faux carbon fiber trim was the least convincing I've ever seen. Handling was boat-like, though at least the ride was smooth.
Another "me-too" SUV. Buick buyers may like it, though.
-juice
Man, notice that Citroen? They make some truly hideous cars!
-juice
Now, the Peugeot Moonster! There is a vehicle!
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
The HM-01 is down right conservative, as compared to the alien-inspired Moonster... This just an observation, not a criticism. Actually, I like both vehicles.
Bob
Then again, it's not aimed at my generation. Maybe if we don't get it, we're too old for it.
-juice
Bob
There are Boomers, then Gen X, then Gen Y or Echo Boomers. I'm Gen X, but the Honda Model X would appeal more to the Gen Y.
Maybe they should call it the Model Y, then? The name Echo is already taken. Boomer is a Q-back that went to my school (U of MD).
-juice
Bob
Bob
http://www.veh-tech.net/
...This is a part of their plan to reduce development costs by introducing sister models of their current lineup (the first model was the Traviq). ...
Isn't the Traviq that GM POS?