• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Subaru Forester, anyone own one of these or know much about them?

PingSpike

PingSpike

Lifer
I'm thinking this is probably a stronger snow driving vehicle then a 4x4 pickup truck. My boss has one of these, she said they traded their truck in for one and just bought a trailer for the forester to do occasional hauling. She says it goes through pretty much anything when driving in the snow, and that she felt that their truck handled poorly in comparison (it is a truck, but still) I'm thinking of copying her and her husbands setup as they're both pretty sharp and I also probably wouldn't have to do a lot of hauling.

Any things to look out for? Subarus are pretty common around here, particularly the outback but I don't know much about them since neither I nor my family has ever owned one. We were thinking of getting one around 5 years old for a second vehicle. I don't know much about those horizontally opposed engines (boxers?) Do they use the use a timing belt or chain?
 
My parents have a 2001 Forester S with about 120,000 miles. Some of the many pluses off the top of my head:

- Nice 6-CD in-dash stereo
- Stock LSD and heated seats on the Forester S. The LSD gives you a little bit more handling reassurance when behind the wheel and the heated seats are some of the best I've experienced
- A generous 7.5"+ of clearance beneath even though it sits a little lower than a CRV, Escape or RAV4 lending a more car-like ride
- Relatively nimble handling for a small SUV
- Fairly roomy with the seats down to haul cargo. I once stuffed a full-size stove and various computer monitors I found curbside and it all fit nicely in the rear with the hatch completely closed with room to spare!
- HUGE sunroof that allows both front and rear passengers to bask in a bit of sun
- Easily averages 26-27MPG on 87-octane
- Windshield, windows and mirrors all seem oversized providing great views for passengers/kids in back. This makes parking and changing lanes a cinch

Negatives I've noticed:
- The rear (engine) seal seems to be a little bit of a weak point on these cars leading to minor, annoying oil leaks
- Passengers taller than 5'10" wouldn't be very comfortable in the rear. Not a problem considering our relatively short family 😉
- Steering feels a bit vague and disconnected. The little effort that is required to turn the steering is great for women drivers like my mother though! But almost any car would seem this way since I drive an E36 3-Series full time 😀
- The doors are frameless. I've noticed this causes the front doors on either side to whistle a little at highway speeds. There's a cheap (partial) fix for this on www.subaruforester.org
- Wished my parents didn't opt for an auto. The 4-speed auto isn't anything special, although newer models should have a much improved 5-speed unit. The easy-to-replace exterior canister-style transmission filter is a neat point, making it easy to service
- The engine isn't exactly gutsy when carrying a significant load, meaning dropping into 3rd and mashing the pedal in an auto is necessary to maintain speed on moderate climbs. Still, performance in even this older (non-turbo) Forester is definitely peppy when compared to that afforded in the base model engines of any other comparable small SUV

I took a ride with my parents a year and a half ago when visiting family in New Mexico, some 900 miles away, and the car handled I-40 at an 80 MPH+ clip with a crammed interior and a loaded (150lbs.+) cargo carrier secured up top with no issues whatsoever. The car still felt sure-footed even when plowing through monsoon winds & rain near Flagstaff on the way back in similar fashion, not that I'd ever dare to do such a silly thing again...

Oh, I believe they have a timing belt, too. On that subject, unlike the engine in my parents' old '86 GL-10, the engines of any later model Subaru are no longer non-interference design, unfortunately. But few are nowadays. 🙁

FYI, the oldest Forester models (1998-2002) actually have just slightly more cargo room than the more modern ones. Nothing too meaningful though. 🙂

I'd be happy to take a stab at answering any other questions you may have, considering I now have extensive history workiing on and occasionally driving their Forester... when I need a "truck." 🙂 You should also definitely check out the forums at www.subaruforester.org for more info.

Good luck with your search and possible Subaru purchase!
 
I loved mine. It was an XT though and only got 19-20mpg on premium. We sold it after increasing our commute to 40 miles each way.
 
Thanks for the into guys. I sort of brought this up to the wife as an alternative to our plans of getting a truck for a second vehicle. After a lot of talking, it initially seemed we just needed a fairly reliable second vehicle that was good in the snow and could haul stuff. But after more discussion, it seemed like my wife would want to use it when we have kids and a lot of people sort of cautioned us that compact trucks weren't the best in the snow. Gas mileage was also a concern, even I4 compact trucks all got pretty lame gas mileage. And it started to seem like the hauling ability was going to be a smaller concern. A trailer is a pain in the ass compared to a truck bed, but it gets the job done and you aren't getting terrible mileage the whole time.

Unfortunately, my wife has an irrational hatred of the word SUV so I've had a tough time winner her over to looking at small SUVs (even though the forester and most small SUVs these days are really more like AWD wagons). I think I've managed to sort of trick her into at least considering the forester. 😛


What are people's opinions of the outback versus the forester? All of these subarus are a lot more fancy a vehicle then I'm really interested in. I like the AWD systems and side air bags, but power everything, A/C, heated seats and all the rest of the fancy doodads are neat but really aren't something I need. It seems like the outback is a little fancier then the forester, and generally costs a little more because of it.

Thanks for the info and website LordUnum...I was wondering about non-interence.
 
Originally posted by: PingSpike

Unfortunately, my wife has an irrational hatred of the word SUV so I've had a tough time winner her over to looking at small SUVs (even though the forester and most small SUVs these days are really more like AWD wagons). I think I've managed to sort of trick her into at least considering the forester. 😛
Click to expand...

Show her the Forester on edmunds.com... it's not listed under SUVs 😎
 
The forester is simply a boxy raised Impreza. It's not an SUV is and is technically a wagon. They are typically more basic than the Outback, which is the highest level of Legacy.


Just know that other small SUV's like the CRV and Rav4 won't have as good an AWD system as the subaru.


Perhaps if you go outside Vermont some you can get them cheaper.


 

I own a 2006 Forester. It's been a great car so far.

It's not an SUV, it's just a tallish wagon. It handles and corners like a car. The base engine has really good low rpm torque, and it will rev quickly if you stamp on the gas. It uses a 'throttle-by-wire' system that might take getting used to if you're coming from an older car.
It's AWD system is better than most other car based SUVs in it's class, it would probably handle ice and snow better than the 4x4 pickup, but the 4x4 would be better for any type of off-road driving.

I'm a big Subaru fanboy. My family has used them extensively in Kenya (Africa) in some very unforgiving situations, and we only ever had one mechanical failure. Sub's are tough little bastards.
 
Foresters are very reliable and have excellent safety ratings. I like to sum up these kinds of Subarus by saying that you get reliability, safety, and performance, at a great price, while forsaking everything else.
The only caution I can think to give is to avoid the 2.5L DOHC engine from '99 and before, as they had headgasket problems. The 2.5L from 2000 and later is torquey and reliable.
With the right tires, Subarus are amazing in the snow. I've taken my WRX through unplowed snow more than twice as deep as the car's ground clearance without a hitch. Keep in mind though that AWD systems are different in the manual and auto transmissions. The 5MT splits torque 50/50 front/rear while the 4EAT defaults to 90/10 F/R with more to the rear only when needed.
Foresters are essentially Imprezas, but do have shorter gear ratios and taller tires. Combined with AWD, the result is less than stellar gas mileage on the highway.
Towing capacity is limited to 2000 lbs. and 200 lb tonque weight, and I'd avoid towing often.
 
Vic: What are the implications of having 50/50 torque split versus the on demand design for the automatic?

I doubt I would tow very often...I was thinking a small open bed trailer to take things to the dump occasionally, maybe bring a riding lawn mower or my snowblower in for service or occasionally buying an odd shaped item.
 
Originally posted by: PingSpike
Vic: What are the implications of having 50/50 torque split versus the on demand design for the automatic?

I doubt I would tow very often...I was thinking a small open bed trailer to take things to the dump occasionally, maybe bring a riding lawn mower or my snowblower in for service or occasionally buying an odd shaped item.
Click to expand...

Starting at 50/50 is a little bit better for sloppy conditions, but the auto setup Subaru uses is pretty darn good, and reacts quickly to slippage. Also the Sub auto setup is 50/50 in first and second gear ( I think, maybe only first gear), then moves to 90/10 in higher gears.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top