Subaru Forester Owners Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

2016 Forester changes (merged thread)

255K views 569 replies 110 participants last post by  Marhooba 
#1 ·
Slowly articles are trickling out into the public about the 2016 Forester changes..

Not much specifics about the engine but if its true that theyre gonna use a 1.6L 4-banger with less than 170hp then Subaru literally sucks (and ive been waiting to buy a new model depending what changes they made mainly to the engine). Many SUVs out there are using higher hp and even v6 engines. Subaru, wake up and make some options available out there! Nobody but soccer momies want to drive an under powered SUV just to save a few gallons..

2016 Subaru Forester Release Date and Changes - 2015 / 2016 Crossover SUV
 
#2 ·
What country are you in? Different markets use smaller engines or different fuels for local tax and income reasons. You left your location unfilled.

However, better than some, you identified you model more completely than just "Forester".
 
#3 · (Edited)
"2016 Subaru Forester Engine

There’s nothing new under the hood. Like the previous model, 2016 Subaru Forester will have a 2.5-liter 4-cylinder boxer which produces 170 hp and 174lb-ft of torque in the basic version. Aside from that, five more trim levels will be available. Those are: 2.5i Premium,Limited,Touring,and 2.0XT Premium ,Touring. The engine is combined with a standard six speed manual transmission and optional continuously variable transmission (CVT). It comes with all-wheel drive."

NO CHANGE IN ENGINE FOR 2016 FORESTER

READ IT HERE: 2016 Subaru Forester Changes, Release Date and Price | Future Car Release

Nothing from Motor Trend about a new engine for the 2016 Forester: http://wot.motortrend.com/1408_subaru_lineup_to_move_to_single_platform_beginning_in_2016.html
 
#4 ·
Not much specifics about the engine but if its true that theyre gonna use a 1.6L 4-banger with less than 170hp then Subaru literally sucks...
My take from the referenced article is that the 1.6L engine along with an electric motor will be part of a hybrid option package for the 2016 Forester:

2016 Subaru Forester Engine Options and Specs:

The future of 2016 Subaru Forester is expected to be more advanced and equipped when it comes to the features of engine. This will be the most important changes that will come new Forester 2016. With the advent in technology and the development of fuel efficient engines, the Subaru has used the hybrid engine in the upcoming model. With the combination of regular as well as electrical engine, one can surely expect to have the better overall performance and to save some extra bucks because of the economic efficiency. Subaru made 1.6 litres, 4-cylinders at a rating of 168 HP, having a speed up to 5000 rpm and maximum torque of 184lb.-ft.

HTH,
Jim / crewzer
 
#8 ·
I would have bought the CX5 as well over a 2.5 Forrester, it was the 20DIT motor that got my attention. The Forester is a mix and match model coming a lot of different ways for various markets. It is rare and a 10 year old Forester will be worth 2 - 3 times as much as a 10 year old CX5.

I will never buy any other new car than a Subaru.
 
#13 ·
I don't know why so many threads have this back and forth between Tony and Eddie. You guys don't need to debate the drivetrain in every thread.


Maybe Subaru will start using the revised FB25 that is found in the US built Legacy and Outback, which produces very similar power numbers but reportedly has 80% new parts vs the FB25 currently found in the Forester.

Revised FB25 for 2015 Outback - Subaru Outback - Subaru Outback Forums
 
#53 ·
Maybe Subaru will start using the revised FB25 that is found in the US built Legacy and Outback, which produces very similar power numbers but reportedly has 80% new parts vs the FB25 currently found in the Forester.
Maybe it's just me, but the way I read the link-as well as previous Subaru releases on the FB25 engine- the 80% parts difference is between the previous engine series (EJ?) and the FB. NOT a difference in FB engine revisions.
 
#14 · (Edited)
Will someone call or email SOA please,and tell them to add paddle shift to all models except the base please? i would also like to see x-mode optional on or at least standard on the premium. Also add led tails and projector beam headlights,and better paint and also a bigger and brighter cargo area light,preferably ceiling mounted. Who ever though a little light on the right side would be enough to illuminate the cargo area? then again every other small suv is the same way. Ditch the little light or add two,or just one ceiling dome light for the rear cargo area. Also add a temperture guage to the guage cluster,or on the VID vehicle information display like the XT.

My wish list
1. Paddle shifters on all models except base.
2. Temp guage display.
3. Ceiling mounted cargo light.
4. X-Mode standard or optional on premium.
5. Better paint quality.
6. Led tails and projector beam headlights.

Also maybe work on a FB25/FB20 turbo motor and bring the diesels over.
 
#16 ·
#29 ·
#22 ·
I live in US so i guess 2.0 is the smaller engine variant.
I was looking to buy a new manual Forester (need cargo space) and i cant get myself to do it because of the mere 170hp. I was considering a CX-5 which kicks out 186hp on a 2.5L but of course the only manual they offer is a 2.0L which they call 'Sport' (a joke). So im stuck here.. do i consider a soccer-momie manual or a more powerful but automatic XT..?
 
#62 ·
If we are being fair, compare the CX5 Sport AWD Automatic ($24xxx, 31mpg highway) to the Forester 2.5i Premium AWD CVT ($24xxx, 29pmg highway).

Early this year, my wife was looking at trading in her '10 Mazda3i (2.0) for a '14 CX5 (2.5) - dealer had been sending her flyers offering her "big money" for her car. ~15hp difference isn't THAT big of a deal it only feels like more when you are revving the p* out of the Mazda motor and only spinning the front wheels. And it is TOTALLY fun in an automatic /sarcasm.

The CX5 is 130# heavier. Automatic vs CVT - meh, neither tickles my naugties, but they both get the car rolling. A time tested AWD system vs Mazda's which started with the '06? Madaspeed6.

Oh look the CX5 Sport is the 155hp 2.0. The 2.5 is Mazda's answer to the XT, not the 2.5i. Still only a ~15hp difference between the CX5 and Forester, but now in favor of your apparent bias. I am surprised Mazda hasn't put the Speed3 2.3T into the CX5 yet. That might give the XT a run.


Also, lets not forget who liked to fudge HP numbers on their RX8s... My 5spd 185hp '04 Mazda3s certainly delivered the goods (and a few tickets), but it never did what it claimed on paper in real life. Between drag strip and auto-x it wasn't competitive with other cars with similar numbers.

HP is just a number on a piece of paper or screen until you go out and drive both. Then buy the one that fits your needs/wants best.
 
#28 ·
To me, the 2014 XT's power felt 'sufficient', but was dulled/slowed by the CVT to the point of being undesirable. Even though I consider my FB25 to be underpowered, when paired with a 6spd, it almost makes up for the lack of power. Almost...

But, to be fair, 170-ish ponies are more than enough to get oneself into trouble. Heck, one horse is enough to get oneself in trouble.
 
#36 ·
Most likely to see a turbo same as the Levoug 1.6l.


This Subaru engine packs with some impressive technologies, which can be told from its 11.0:1 compression ratio. If you think this ratio is not high enough, please do not forget this is a turbocharged engine, not a naturally aspirated engine. Also the FB16 engine does not requires premium gas to run, it is designed to run with the regular 87 octane gas. Below are some close look photos of the new engine.
Not sure how much credence you can give this.

2016 Subaru Forester Will Come with 1.6T Engine - YouWheel.com - Car News, Car Review

Turbochargers: Small Engine Performance - Turbo Technology
 
#39 ·
I dont want a race car SUV but i really dont think 170hp for a 3.5k lbs SUV (thats not necessarily aerodynamic) is enough. Especially if U load it up or pull something up to 1500lbs they advertise..
Why does an Outback offer a 3.6L and not the Forester for example?
Somebody mentioned here the 2.0L CX-5. I drove it at a dealer (with a manual) and ots the exact reason why i ran away. It felt very underpowered for a normal SUV drive around. The Forester is heavier, less air-sleek and feels a bit the same way.. so yes, 170hp does sound 'mere' here
 
#42 ·
I agree. The NA Forester needs about 190-200 hp to perform adequately based on my standards, and I imagine this could be reached with DI, and without a turbo or premium required. Torque would also go up. I would like that.

Maybe you should have test driven the 2.5 CX-5, it's very responsive and has a step 6 speed auto. Problem is, you can't see out of the darn thing. The belt line is so high it feels like sitting in a high sided bathtub and the view out back looks like a port hole. So that was a no for me.

Ergo, I drive a Forester. Underpowered, but the visibility is great.

EJ
 
#40 ·
The Outback needs the 2.0L turbo from the Forester more than the Forester needs the 3.6L from the Outback.

The H6 is not a competitive engine against the turbo, and it's totally outclassed compared to V6 offerings from other manufactures.

Back in the day, I'd drive around in a FJ60 Land Cruiser with all of 107 hp, dragging around 4,500 lbs or so. It would routinely get passed by city busses, cement trucks and tractor trailers on long hills. It was pretty great in many respects, but it couldn't get out of its own way.
 
#41 · (Edited)
My last car was 117hp had around 57 cubic feet of cargo room and weighed in around 2,500 lbs. Was kind of cool with the low hp and handle great. Only down side was A/C was weak and no real high end torque. Was a manual so taking off from dead starts could be quick if you left it in a low gear. Once you were on the highway and up to speed you were no different from the rest of the traffic.
 
#46 ·
I'm almost certain the 3.6 would fit easily. People have crammed it into older Impreza chassis before, it's not much longer than the 4cyl 2.5 surprisingly. The only thing is I'm also almost certain that Subaru would keep that engine online in the "premium" Legacy and Outback lines.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top