Are you a current Michigan-based car shopper? A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/2 for details.
I said the same thing to myself. That hints strongly that the next Forester will indeed move to the Legacy platform, because of the timing. We'd heard such a rumor before, too. Remember that GM also hinted that eventually they'd shift Forester production to the US. Conspiracy theories collide!
My biggest fears are price and weight. The Outback is already a bit on the heavy side, so the Forester would require more than the 2.5l to motivate its 3800 lbs or so.
I hope that we're wrong; that it will be a seperate model from the Forester. Perhaps my much wanted Grand Forester.
There is room for the Forester to compete with the sport/cutes, and the Grand Forester to go up against the Highlander. I doubt they have the resources to get both models to market though. Given the Outback Sport is so close to the current Forester, maybe they'll allow that model to pick up the slack on the lower end.
Wait a minute. ...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). ...
Yes, Traviq is the Opel mini-minivan with an in-line 4 banger mounted transversely with front wheel drive (i.e. not a real Subaru).
Let's do some math, here. The Forester L is about 250 or so lbs heavier than an Outback Sport.
A base Outback weighs 3425 lbs, so that would be a base Forester at about 3700 lbs. A bit porky.
The VDC weighs 3715 lbs, so a loaded up Forester could near two tons. Absolutely porcine!
Not sure I'd like that. They'd better keep weight under control. The 2.5l is about at its limit with the Outback's weight, so the 3.0l or a light pressure turbo had better be standard.
Seems like from a marketing perspective it would be a disaster. Right now sub goes for the all models awd theme. Then the would have to accomodate that junker. Talk about burning your reputation for nothing.
Only the Rav4 and Grand Vitara, of the mini-utes, have shorter wheelbases than the Forester. All the others have wheelbases between 102" and 104.x".
If this is the next Forester, based off the Legacy/Outback platform, that would mean a wheelbase at 104.4" wheelbase—right in the ballpark with most of the others. The Highlander has a wheelbase close to 107".
One other thing - the Forester would likely get a lot wider.
I recall the Outback was already wider than the Forester before the 2000 redesign. That 2000 model got an extra 1.5" IIRC, so the new Forester would be a wide body.
Also, they would likely build any Legacy-based SUVs in the USA.
There is still a press release at subaru.com about the STX coming is the third quarter of 2002 and based on the lagacy frame. There is also a web site:
Boy oh boy do I want one of those B4s. Those headlights are a nice detail.
Interesting - the HM01 is a through-the-road hybrid electric. The size and a 660cc engine means it's likely not for US sale, though. Plus, Subaru is supposed to get this technology from GM (in the form of fuel cells, I hope). I'm surprised to even see such a concept.
Legacys get an aluminum hood. Hope US ones do also.
An STX with 230HP while only weighing 3,500lbs would make it one of the fastest production trucks out there (if not the fastest). One thing I'm not carzy about is the fabric roof and I'm sure Bob isn't happy about the 2,000lb towing capacity either. Still, I can definitely see the STX being successful in a market niche all its own.
Let's say resources are limited, and you had to choose only certain features. How would you prioritize your wish list for the BRAT?
A. Engine with +200hp (instead of 2.5l) B. Mid-gate C. 3500 lb towing capacity D. Bi-drive (low range)
That's my order right there. Engine is key. Then the mid-gate for functionality. The towing next, for extra utility. Then, finally, the low range, which would be useful for towing, so I put towing first.
How would you guys rank them in order of importance?
While I'm not interested in the BRAT type of vehicle, I think you've got the priorities right. HP sells (period), the midgate would say "versatility", the higher towing limit says "utility", bi-drive (with good clearance) says "off-road".
Absolutely. When getting down-'n-dirty, the trailer is the way to go. You've seen our yard. I haul around 8 trailer loads of leaves to the landfill in the fall. Can you imagine me doing that with just the pickup bed of the BRAT. No way. I certainly wouldn't put the mid-gate down for that kind of work.
We're in the process right now of cleaning out the garage (a.k.a. Dagwood's closet—for those old enough to remember Blondie, the comic strip), and part of the basement. The trailer has been great. It would be a much tougher job with just the BRAT.
While the idea of the mid-gate is great, I put it after the By-Drive, because I see the By-Drive as part of the towing capabilty feature. Again at the landfill, which is off-road, pulling a trailer and having the By-Drive would be great.
Well, I guess the open mid gate is for carrying long but "clean" objects, then? ;-)
I'd use the BRAT on the beach. It would be just perfect. I need the back seat, and the bed is big enough for chairs, umbrellas, coolers and fishing gear.
-juice
PS Your landfill is quite different than mine, then. In MontCo you pull right up, but it's all paved.
Most people, I think, buy based upon "Gee, with that I could ..." The mid-gate would really tap into that factor in a big way whether it is practical or not. :-)
1. Engine with +200hp (instead of 2.5l). Preferrably turbo charged to compensate for altitude. 2. Mid-gate 3. Bi-drive (low range) 4. 3500 lb towing capacity
and of course the option of a tent over the load bed like in the Aztek. I am serious!! Sleeping in the back of the Forester gives you a pain in the neck.
Yes, I am very interested in this type of vehicle.
There had been some talk about the WRX being "cheap" with few luxury fittings.
I would like to see the WRX (both sedan and wagon) to have a Limited version that will upgrade the interior to the levels of the Outback Limited models. With the addition of sound deadening materials, optional leather, wheels, less or better plastic/vinyl, 5-speed auto/manumatic option, etc. at a price point of about $2,000 more, the car will very successfully compete with Audi, BMW and such.
Interesting. I have heard a few people ask for more pampering, I guess.
I agree that gee-whiz factors like the mid-gate help sell cars. But so is getting pressed back into your seat by a turbo! :-)
Have you tried an inflatable mattress? You can remove the front head rests, push the seats all the way forward, tilt them down, and get a flat base for a mattress.
I agree with Ross that the mid-gate would really be a selling point. I see the target market as people looking for the "fun" factor as opposed to the "utility" factor.
On a recent camping trip I loaded a futon in the back of the Forester and slept in there. It was reasonably comfortable, but would have been impossible for two. I am 6', 210lb and "middle aged". I normally carry the tent and inflatable mattress and use that when camping.
My friends in the back of their Toyota 4-Runner were far more comfortable.
I really like the concept of the tent over the loadbed as done in the Aztek. It is just the execution in that vehicle that leaves much to be desired. The whole concept of a multiple use vehicle that can be adjusted to the specific need at the time appeals to me. My ultimate vehicle would be a cross between a Lamborghini, Rolls Royce and a military spec Hummer. I am really excited about the possibilities for the STX/BRAT.
I agree with you that a turbo is a must, not necessarily for the additional power, more for compensating for the loss of power due to altitude. Turbo's have lost their stigma of 10-15 years ago and should be implemented far more main stream.
In the Future Telling article that is attached to this page, it says that the ST-X will have the flat 6-cylinder which is fine with me. I think an engine like this will produce more torque at a lower RPM than a supercharged one, and I believe that this would increase towing ability and decrease wear and tear on the drivetrain (especially the clutch). Does anyone know what the towing capacity is on the 3.0l Outback is?, it will probably be the same or better with the manual transmission. So far the vehicle looks good to me, I just want to see what it costs and the effectivness of the switch back design.
I belive the towing capacity for the H6 is still 1500 lbs. I suspect the limit is not because of the engine but the frame of the car. Since it has a car frame, not a truck frame it doesn't have the stiffness of a truck for the extended towing capacity. Unless they reinforce the frame I suspect the STX will suffer the same limitation.
I hope that subaru really does get innovative on this vehical. I'm afraid what will come out will be Legacy Frame Same towing Same engine 2.5L (no turbo) Same interior as base model Maybe a sunroof Same transmission No switchback. Nicely priced Maybe 2-3 years down the line we will see the version we REALLY want. For whatever reason SOA seems to be pretty timid when it comes to adding power and capacity. Some of it is saftey related or emissions, some of it is to avoid bad PR. Subaru seems to be going after safety and reliablity as its key points. Selling cars that are engineered to the max and bought by a demographic that will push them past the limit could aquire unwanted associations and insurance rates.
I've camped out in my Legacy before. Threw a couple of therma-rests and had a decent night. The problem I had was condensation on the inside of the windows reducing visibility the next day and needing to be cleaned off.
Everybody seems to think that just because it's a "car" that the towing capacity has to be very low. Not so. Volvos can tow 3300 pounds. I believe a number of European sedans can tow in that range. Car-based SUVs, like the MDX, RX300, Escape, and Highlander all can tow (if properly equipped) 3500 pounds or—in the case of the MDX, more than 3500 pounds.
My criteria for my future wagon will be whether it can support a bicycle as well as allow me to stretch out reasonably well. For this reason I would like a Legacy, or a "Grand Forrester" if they make one.
The H6 is rated for 1000 lbs, 2000 lbs if you have trailer brakes. Neither the H6 nor the upgraded brakes on the Forester S (vs. the L) make any difference in tow ratings.
In Europe even the 2.0l engine is rated for 1800 kg, or 3960 lbs. SoA has conservative lawyers, I'm guessing.
What about a roof mounted tent, like the Discos have. Those are wild. $7 grand though.
A few of my friends use them in South Africa on top of their Land Rovers, Ssang Yung Musso and various Toyota derivatives. You need to, to get out of the way of various carniverous animals and those pesty baboons. It is an easy way to quickly set up camp and to sleep in comfort.
I am not sure whether they will fit on the Forester. Not really needed in tame America.
I see what you mean, tincup. In motion, they have to take vehicle dynamics like the center of gravity into effect. So the Soob probably could hold a camping package on the roof.
I don't think the WRX is rated for towing at all. You really don't want to experience 14 psi with a trailer behind you. It's not well suited to the task.
Comments
My biggest fears are price and weight. The Outback is already a bit on the heavy side, so the Forester would require more than the 2.5l to motivate its 3800 lbs or so.
I hope that we're wrong; that it will be a seperate model from the Forester. Perhaps my much wanted Grand Forester.
There is room for the Forester to compete with the sport/cutes, and the Grand Forester to go up against the Highlander. I doubt they have the resources to get both models to market though. Given the Outback Sport is so close to the current Forester, maybe they'll allow that model to pick up the slack on the lower end.
-juice
...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?
Let's do some math, here. The Forester L is about 250 or so lbs heavier than an Outback Sport.
A base Outback weighs 3425 lbs, so that would be a base Forester at about 3700 lbs. A bit porky.
The VDC weighs 3715 lbs, so a loaded up Forester could near two tons. Absolutely porcine!
Not sure I'd like that. They'd better keep weight under control. The 2.5l is about at its limit with the Outback's weight, so the 3.0l or a light pressure turbo had better be standard.
-juice
..Mike
..Mike
Bob,
News and Senior Editor (a.k.a. Editor for Subie Seniors)
Subaru Crew
..Mike
..Mike
If this is the next Forester, based off the Legacy/Outback platform, that would mean a wheelbase at 104.4" wheelbase—right in the ballpark with most of the others. The Highlander has a wheelbase close to 107".
Bob
..Mike
..Mike
Bob
Ken
I recall the Outback was already wider than the Forester before the 2000 redesign. That 2000 model got an extra 1.5" IIRC, so the new Forester would be a wide body.
Also, they would likely build any Legacy-based SUVs in the USA.
-juice
HM-01 info
Lot's of details here on this fascinating model.
http://www.subaru.co.nz/news/index.html?id=145
'02 NZ Legacy & Outback
Again, lots of details, some of which I bet we see here in '03.
http://www.subaru.co.nz/news/index.html?id=135
NZ STi
They've sold out the first batch. The next batch is due around the first of the year. Again, lots of details here.
http://www.subaru.co.nz/news/index.html?id=97
Bob
http://www.subaru.com/STX/
Interesting - the HM01 is a through-the-road hybrid electric. The size and a 660cc engine means it's likely not for US sale, though. Plus, Subaru is supposed to get this technology from GM (in the form of fuel cells, I hope). I'm surprised to even see such a concept.
Legacys get an aluminum hood. Hope US ones do also.
-juice
An STX with 230HP while only weighing 3,500lbs would make it one of the fastest production trucks out there (if not the fastest). One thing I'm not carzy about is the fabric roof and I'm sure Bob isn't happy about the 2,000lb towing capacity either. Still, I can definitely see the STX being successful in a market niche all its own.
-Frank P.
Bob
A. Engine with +200hp (instead of 2.5l)
B. Mid-gate
C. 3500 lb towing capacity
D. Bi-drive (low range)
That's my order right there. Engine is key. Then the mid-gate for functionality. The towing next, for extra utility. Then, finally, the low range, which would be useful for towing, so I put towing first.
How would you guys rank them in order of importance?
-juice
B. 3500 lb towing capacity
C. Bi-drive (low range)
D. Mid-gate
I like all those features, but if I had to prioritize them, this is what I'd choose.
Bob
Ross
If the mid-gate worked, then it seems to me like you'd be less likely to need to tow.
I guess a trailer is still a neater solution to hauling mulch, because the mid gate would leave the interior exposed.
-juice
We're in the process right now of cleaning out the garage (a.k.a. Dagwood's closet—for those old enough to remember Blondie, the comic strip), and part of the basement. The trailer has been great. It would be a much tougher job with just the BRAT.
While the idea of the mid-gate is great, I put it after the By-Drive, because I see the By-Drive as part of the towing capabilty feature. Again at the landfill, which is off-road, pulling a trailer and having the By-Drive would be great.
Bob
I'd use the BRAT on the beach. It would be just perfect. I need the back seat, and the bed is big enough for chairs, umbrellas, coolers and fishing gear.
-juice
PS Your landfill is quite different than mine, then. In MontCo you pull right up, but it's all paved.
I agree as a "beach buggy" and for clean stuff, the mid-gate would be great.
Bob
Ross
1. Engine with +200hp (instead of 2.5l). Preferrably turbo charged to compensate for altitude.
2. Mid-gate
3. Bi-drive (low range)
4. 3500 lb towing capacity
and of course the option of a tent over the load bed like in the Aztek. I am serious!! Sleeping in the back of the Forester gives you a pain in the neck.
Yes, I am very interested in this type of vehicle.
Daniel
I would like to see the WRX (both sedan and wagon) to have a Limited version that will upgrade the interior to the levels of the Outback Limited models. With the addition of sound deadening materials, optional leather, wheels, less or better plastic/vinyl, 5-speed auto/manumatic option, etc. at a price point of about $2,000 more, the car will very successfully compete with Audi, BMW and such.
Daniel
I agree that gee-whiz factors like the mid-gate help sell cars. But so is getting pressed back into your seat by a turbo! :-)
Have you tried an inflatable mattress? You can remove the front head rests, push the seats all the way forward, tilt them down, and get a flat base for a mattress.
OK, it's your homework to try that. ;-)
-juice
B. Mid-gate
C. Towing
d. Bi-drive
I agree with Ross that the mid-gate would really be a selling point. I see the target market as people looking for the "fun" factor as opposed to the "utility" factor.
-Frank P.
On a recent camping trip I loaded a futon in the back of the Forester and slept in there. It was reasonably comfortable, but would have been impossible for two. I am 6', 210lb and "middle aged". I normally carry the tent and inflatable mattress and use that when camping.
My friends in the back of their Toyota 4-Runner were far more comfortable.
I really like the concept of the tent over the loadbed as done in the Aztek. It is just the execution in that vehicle that leaves much to be desired. The whole concept of a multiple use vehicle that can be adjusted to the specific need at the time appeals to me. My ultimate vehicle would be a cross between a Lamborghini, Rolls Royce and a military spec Hummer. I am really excited about the possibilities for the STX/BRAT.
I agree with you that a turbo is a must, not necessarily for the additional power, more for compensating for the loss of power due to altitude. Turbo's have lost their stigma of 10-15 years ago and should be implemented far more main stream.
Daniel
Stephen
I hope that subaru really does get innovative on this vehical. I'm afraid what will come out will be
Legacy Frame
Same towing
Same engine 2.5L (no turbo)
Same interior as base model
Maybe a sunroof
Same transmission
No switchback.
Nicely priced
Maybe 2-3 years down the line we will see the version we REALLY want.
For whatever reason SOA seems to be pretty timid when it comes to adding power and capacity. Some of it is saftey related or emissions, some of it is to avoid bad PR. Subaru seems to be going after safety and reliablity as its key points. Selling cars that are engineered to the max and bought by a demographic that will push them past the limit could aquire unwanted associations and insurance rates.
I've camped out in my Legacy before. Threw a couple of therma-rests and had a decent night. The problem I had was condensation on the inside of the windows reducing visibility the next day and needing to be cleaned off.
I hope Subaru gets the message.
Bob
Bob
Daniel
In Europe even the 2.0l engine is rated for 1800 kg, or 3960 lbs. SoA has conservative lawyers, I'm guessing.
What about a roof mounted tent, like the Discos have. Those are wild. $7 grand though.
-juice
I am not sure whether they will fit on the Forester. Not really needed in tame America.
Daniel
-juice
1)MDX can only tow 3500lbs if it's a boat. otherwise 3K only
2)you should only tow 70-75% of the max load
3)The heavier your vehicle, the better, also wheelbased is a consideration as well.
-mike
Bob
I don't think the WRX is rated for towing at all. You really don't want to experience 14 psi with a trailer behind you. It's not well suited to the task.
-juice