Subaru Forester Owners Forum banner
1 - 20 of 83 Posts

·
Registered
2004 Forester XT 5spd
Joined
·
236 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
My 99 Forester's timing belt broke and &*%@ed my engine something fierce, so I'm looking for a replacement.

I've been pretty much set on getting a new Forester XT but the latest issue of Car and Driver arrived last week and they did a nice article comparing all the crossover SUV's where they rated the Forester XT #4 and the Toyota Rav4 #1.

The Rav4's got a 6 cyl with 45 more horsepower than the Subaru and it sounds like the suspension is significantly stiffer. It's also capable of towing 1500lbs more than the Forester. (I don't have a need for towing yet but I don't want to ignore this stat.)

The Rav4's also less expensive.

Anyone have experience with these? What are your thoughts?
 

·
Registered
2009 Forester X Premium
Joined
·
125 Posts
Sort of boils down to what you really want and how you are going to use it...?
 

·
Registered
2007 Forester
Joined
·
183 Posts
Interesting....Toyota builds a reliable vehicle (usually). I'm from a Honda CR-V background but always admired the Rav4. Now that I own a '07 Forester I'm hooked on Subaru.

Just wanted to lurk on this thread! Happy hunting!

Rick
 

·
Registered
none none
Joined
·
8,844 Posts
The 2010 models of each are honestly pretty similar. For a daily driver I would probably go with the toyota v6 over the XT engine, unless you want to start modding or something. Forester's AWD is better. Honestly I think it will come down to which you enjoy sitting in and driving the most.
 

·
Fast & Dirty
2009 Forester XT 4 speed auto
Joined
·
4,039 Posts
Hi.

The Forester for 2010 is the same Forester that won ALL the awards in 2009. Do not base your decision purely on this one article. The Rav 4 owners will tell you not to base your decision on all the 2009 comparisons.

The reason I did not consider the Rav was the rear door. Utter pain in the donkey. Try opening the door in a garage. Better yet while street parked. Nothing beats having to step into traffic to open and close a door.

When considering price please compare apples to apples. The websites for both have pricing almost the same. Actually has a XT for 26k Rav4 28k.

Towing, do a search on towing. I fail to see how it is safe to tow 4000 lbs when the car doesn't weight 4000 lbs.

Even with their improvements I wouldn't buy a Rav4. Toyota has to realize the rear door is crap.
 

·
Registered
2004 Forester XT 5spd
Joined
·
236 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Well I plan on commuting in it and taking it into the mountains. I took my old Forester EVERYWHERE. Snow, off-road, and the highway. I plan to take it to Canada for a road trip this summer so comfort is a plus.

I have a lead foot from time to time so having some decent performance is also a plus.
 

·
Registered
1997 Outback
Joined
·
15 Posts
The Toyota RAV4's six cylinder engine is more reliable than Subaru's four cylinder XT. The automotive forums veritably bristle with tales of Surbaru turbo engine failures, head gasket problems, timing belt ruptures, etc. while there is little if any reporting of RAV4 six cylinder engine problems.
 

·
Official sf.org decal guy
2006 FXT
Joined
·
12,367 Posts
The automotive forums veritably bristle with tales of Surbaru turbo engine failures, head gasket problems, timing belt ruptures, etc. while there is little if any reporting of RAV4 six cylinder engine problems.
Like which forums? And if you're referring to the 2.5t issue in 09, there was a stop sale for that and from what I understand the 2010 models are not effected (affected?).

The headgaskets have never been a problem in the turbo miles. And I am unaware of any "timing belt ruptures". Please post up where you are getting this information. I'd be interested to read over it. Otherwise I would take that statement with a grain of salt. Sure they have had their problems, but in my book Subaru has always been labled as reliable.
 

·
Registered
2009 Forester XT Ltd
Joined
·
46 Posts
As far as the AWD issue goes, do a search on this forum, or the internet in general. Toyota's system is very front-drive biased, no power to the rear until slippage is detected. Subaru's is always engaged. There's plenty of info out there, on this site and elsewhere.

Another issue, depending on how you use you car, is ground clearance. Here, the Forester is the clear winner. That's actually what disqualified the Rav4 for me - I actually leave the pavement almost daily. If you stay on the asphalt, then the Rav4 is a nice vehicle, and the v6 is a bit quicker than the XT.
 

·
Registered
2007 Mitsubishi Pajero 5spd Automatic
Joined
·
3,572 Posts
I agree on the awd system. The clip I watched from the Aus top gear where they tested the new soft roaders suggested the rav4 still can't get enough power to the rear to actually make use of them. He spinned the tires and the rear did around nothing. :huh:

http://www.topgear.com/au/videos/softroad-softies-2
 

·
Registered
2010 Subaru Forester
Joined
·
113 Posts
The Toyota is more comfortable. Better front seats and a dent where your right leg rests against the center console. The Venza is even more comfortable.

Other than the comfort issue I prefer the Foz. I have a 2010 with the power seat. The Foz is more comfortable than any other crossover except the Toyotas (and Outback)

I'd look at an outback too if comfort is an issue but you still want the Subrau techs.

PS: my idea of hell on earth would be having to drive a Honda cvx. Most uncomfortable crossover I checked out.

SBS
 

·
Registered
2007 Sports XT 4EAT (former)
Joined
·
2,485 Posts
The Toyota RAV4's six cylinder engine is more reliable than Subaru's four cylinder XT. The automotive forums veritably bristle with tales of Surbaru turbo engine failures, head gasket problems, timing belt ruptures, etc. while there is little if any reporting of RAV4 six cylinder engine problems.
FYI - no engine is perfect. Love the RAV4 V6? Read this gem: Home (As of November 2009 - January 2010) (ToyotaV6OilLineScandal)

Not saying that the XT engine failures are excusable, but forums always "bristle" with more negative stories than positive ones.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
Well I plan on commuting in it and taking it into the mountains. I took my old Forester EVERYWHERE. Snow, off-road, and the highway. I plan to take it to Canada for a road trip this summer so comfort is a plus.

I have a lead foot from time to time so having some decent performance is also a plus.
If you are going in the mountains remember that all non-Turbo engines will lose a % of hp for every 1000ft of altitude so the higher hp in the Toyota won't all be there when u need it..Altitude won't affect the Turbo to a lot lesser degree. I contemplated between the same 2 vehicles...and picked up my XT 3 weeks ago...
 

·
Registered
2001 Forester Slushbox
Joined
·
1,777 Posts
Well I plan on commuting in it and taking it into the mountains. I took my old Forester EVERYWHERE. Snow, off-road, and the highway. I plan to take it to Canada for a road trip this summer so comfort is a plus.

I have a lead foot from time to time so having some decent performance is also a plus.
Off road?
Buy the Forester.
 

·
Registered
2017 Forester XT Touring
Joined
·
1,067 Posts
I agree on the awd system. The clip I watched from the Aus top gear where they tested the new soft roaders suggested the rav4 still can't get enough power to the rear to actually make use of them. He spinned the tires and the rear did around nothing. :huh:

Soft-road softies 2 - BBC Top Gear Australia
Cool video. But for the race, it's not right that they pitted the RAV4 V6 against the N/A Forester... at least put the XT in there!
 

·
Registered
2007 Mitsubishi Pajero 5spd Automatic
Joined
·
3,572 Posts
Cool video. But for the race, it's not right that they pitted the RAV4 V6 against the N/A Forester... at least put the XT in there!
I agree that the race is stupid. Besides the drivers drove very different too, They should have atleast have used one driver for all the cars to get it more correct.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
176 Posts
One thing you should keep in mind if you live in a residential area or downtown is the fact that the 2010 Rav4 has a significantly larger blind spot when it comes to the c pillars in comparison to the Subaru Forester. One thing that is OKAY on the Rav4 is that they offer an option of a 3rd row seat (even though it's really just meant for kids) which the Subaru Forester doesn't offer. Personally if you want to carry more than 5 passengers, the logically thing would be to buy a bigger SUV or a minivan.

Oh, and this is something you should think about when you're looking at the Rav4:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMO9x9wpldU&feature=related

:) Oh and this too.

Roof strength evaluations: Small SUVs

I don't know about you but when my car is upside down for whatever reason, I'm hoping my roof is strong enough to keep me alive until I can crawl out or until help arrives. I can't say with confidence that the Rav4 will give you that opportunity. I don't care one bit if Toyota said "well rollover tests are really hard to do well in". Subaru didn't budge seeing as it received the highest rating, GOOD, from the IIHS in a rollover crash test.

The Subaru Forester has a better crash test history than the Toyota Rav4. That should say something. Even though Toyota was the first car manufacturer to put a crossover on the market, they should have done it right the first time instead of waiting until the third generation to get it right.

I'm not too happy with the Rav4's 4WD either when it comes to 4WD and AWD cars. Subaru obviously has a better system set up.

Don't get me wrong, I love Toyota since I come from a Toyota family. The only car we own that isn't a Toyota is a Chevrolet Suburban that we use when our grandmother comes to stay with us during the summer and fall (seats our entire family of 7 including grandma). Other than that, we've been primarily only buying Toyota cars. Being an Asian family, we have more trust for the reliable Asian cars. =P

But me and my mother have been looking at the Subaru Forester since 1998 and we both agree that a Subaru Forester is one of the most capable cars when it comes to Colorado and the snow we get here. She says it's the best car for snow and off-roading but I don't want to go as far as to say just that until I've tested all of the other SUV's in our winters. :biggrin:

If you're set on Toyota, I would suggest the Highlander instead of the Rav4. It can get pricey, but it's worth it for that price. I love their 2nd row middle seat stow away and the much better accommodated 3rd row seat (it's MUCH more cramped back there in the Rav4). You get near similar (or better, don't quote me on that) acceleration and power in the Highlander when compared to the Rav4 and most of the other features that make the Rav4 popular. I can't say anything about the 4WD on the Highlander though; I haven't had the opportunity to drive one of the recent ones in the snow.

If I knew how well the Toyota Highlander's 4WD worked, I just might be more inclined to buy one instead of a Subaru Forester. But because I don't know in addition to knowing how well the Subaru Forester's AWD works, I choose the Subaru Forester instead. It's too bad though, I really like a lot of the things the Toyota Highlander has too. But that doesn't mean anything if I'm I can't drive safely in the conditions it's meant to be driven in or if I get stuck. I can only do so much until it's left up to the tires and my car.
 
1 - 20 of 83 Posts
Top