"Appalled". Right.
Zero sympathy here.
What were you expecting?
And why didn't you know ahead of time the "poor mileage" rating of the car? It's not like they kept it a secret since every new car comes with an EPA mileage rating sticker ...and heaven knows there's enough online information on the subject. Nowhere in any fuel mileage stat will you find it starting with the number "3" with regard to the Fozzie.
Here's a link to the EPA website and the mileage ratings that should have been on the window sticker: https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/bymodel/2017_Subaru_Forester.shtml
I'm sure you realize these EPA ratings bear very little on the actual in-use real world MPG's you're going to get. Right? The old rule was to take the city mileage and use it as expected real world highway mileage; city mileage would be less. But the numbers you're getting are in the ballpark and in the realm of realistic.
The Forester is a relatively high CG vehicle ...more ground clearance, a higher profile and less aerodynamics than most cars ...it is a mini UTE ...and all these features work against fuel mileage.
On top of that you have an All Wheel Drive system that cannot be partially disengaged to allow a 2WD system; more moving parts means more parasitic power loss and with that goes fuel mileage. In reality, for a vehicle of this type with AWD the mileage is quite good. And 2.5L is a relatively big 4-cylinder engine as well.
My 2011 Forester 2.5X Premium, with the 4EAT automatic, gets about 24-25 MPG in my mixed driving. Strictly freeway driving I might get 27MPG and I've seen it drop down to the low 20's under mostly city driving. I knew before I bought my Foz (three years new) these cars were not mileage champs ...but that wasn't a driving factor for me. If fuel mileage was such an important issue then why did you buy a Forester? It shouldn't have come as any surprise to you if you'd chosen to look and research the topic before you pulled the trigger.
Zero sympathy here.
What were you expecting?
And why didn't you know ahead of time the "poor mileage" rating of the car? It's not like they kept it a secret since every new car comes with an EPA mileage rating sticker ...and heaven knows there's enough online information on the subject. Nowhere in any fuel mileage stat will you find it starting with the number "3" with regard to the Fozzie.
Here's a link to the EPA website and the mileage ratings that should have been on the window sticker: https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/bymodel/2017_Subaru_Forester.shtml
I'm sure you realize these EPA ratings bear very little on the actual in-use real world MPG's you're going to get. Right? The old rule was to take the city mileage and use it as expected real world highway mileage; city mileage would be less. But the numbers you're getting are in the ballpark and in the realm of realistic.
The Forester is a relatively high CG vehicle ...more ground clearance, a higher profile and less aerodynamics than most cars ...it is a mini UTE ...and all these features work against fuel mileage.
On top of that you have an All Wheel Drive system that cannot be partially disengaged to allow a 2WD system; more moving parts means more parasitic power loss and with that goes fuel mileage. In reality, for a vehicle of this type with AWD the mileage is quite good. And 2.5L is a relatively big 4-cylinder engine as well.
My 2011 Forester 2.5X Premium, with the 4EAT automatic, gets about 24-25 MPG in my mixed driving. Strictly freeway driving I might get 27MPG and I've seen it drop down to the low 20's under mostly city driving. I knew before I bought my Foz (three years new) these cars were not mileage champs ...but that wasn't a driving factor for me. If fuel mileage was such an important issue then why did you buy a Forester? It shouldn't have come as any surprise to you if you'd chosen to look and research the topic before you pulled the trigger.
