A guy at work owns a 2011 with the manual transmission. He says it fine around town @ 5,000 to 6,000 feet, but struggles on some of the hills like Floyd Hill and Vail pass.
It can't be as bad as some of the 18 wheel trucks I see doing 30 MPH up the hills.

I figure I drive that road 2 times a year (out and return as one trip). If I get the 2.5L engine, I will just have to deal with it.

 

There were points where i struggled to get it past 50mph. The worst was getting stuck behind slow traffic as accelerating around was always laughable. I suppose i should look at as 3 hours of scenic driving.

Would a aftermarket fresh air intake give me anymore power?

 

Yep, I live near I-70 right at the start of the mountains in Colorado. All my test drives went up Floyd Hill. Thus, I got the XT.

Not too much you can do to help the NA engine. New cams or EL Header/exhaust would help, but other than that, the manual transmission or the new CVT will handle it better than the auto.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

 

Not too much you can do to help the NA engine. New cams or EL Header/exhaust would help, but other than that, the manual transmission or the new CVT will handle it better than the auto.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

Should the CVT in the 2014 be able to handle the hills on i-70 or other mountain passes in Colorado? I'm looking into a 2014, but my biggest concern is getting up the hills at higher altitudes since I ski alot. Trying to avoid the additional cost of getting a XT if I can.

 

Turbo.....

Unless you're running a turbo, everything will struggle at 11,000'.

My 2012 Forester X runs about 55mph up to Eisenhower tunnel, my son's 99 Forester L does it at about 45mph and the wife's '11 Nissan Juke can take it at about 70mph. That's being reasonable with the vehicle. I could probably push it a little faster if I wanted to be hard on a vehicle. My '99 3/4 ton chevy would only do 65mph up to the tunnel and it had an injected 454. I see people go faster up the hills with thier foot matted to the floor, but that just sucks alot of gas and generates alot of heat in the transmission.
If you want to drive fast in the mountains, I suggest a turbo diesel. Otherwise, take your time and enjoy the scenery. IMO

 

I would not worry about it. Occasionally one may see a broken-down vehicle but nearly everyone arrives at the top, just some faster than others. Even if you could drive up at 85 MPH, there are enough other cars that don't or can't, so you are stuck behind them.

A few guys spend $57,000 on a diesel and then add $4,000 of modifications just to be able to pull a trailer up at 75 mph and for what? Maybe they save 4 minutes of travel time on a 7 hour drive from Denver to Hayden or Meeker. My brother-in-law was one of these. He owned a V8 gas Chevy pickup which was a nice truck. It could not tow his trailer more than 10 mpg through Cottonwood Pass. He did make it, the trip was just 10 minutes longer. He took that route two or three times a year, so he bought a new $57,000 diesel F-250 truck. He has since sold it, sold the trailer, and has serious debt issues now.

 

I am not looking to go 85. From some of the things I've read/heard people sound like they can barely push 20-30 going up some hills. Perhaps it's just exaggerations.

The 02 Ford Foucs I currently have can go 50-55 going up Vail pass. As long as the forester can match what my focus currently does, I'll be happy.

 

I have an intake and exhaust on mine (n/a) and was only able to do 45-50 up the mountains in that area. In the tunnel, I got up to 55-60. But my foot was buried. ... And then I pulled a small trailer with my car loaded up and over heading east. :shake: I was doing 25 in 1st and still barely maintaining with semi's barreling past me. :icon_eek:

 

Gotta get the first chair?
Buy a turbo (and befriend a liftie)