Subaru Forester Owners Forum banner

1 - 20 of 41 Posts

·
Registered
2014 2.5i Premium manual
Joined
·
50 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)

·
Registered
2017 Forester XT Touring
Joined
·
12 Posts
Agree that the newer Subi SUV's have a serious lack oomph in the power department, but also realize that this is the same rag that decided the Wrangler was the 2018 SUV of the year. A vehicle they admitted sucked to drive on the pavement and had other issues. "...second-row ingress and egress remains cramped, tire and wind noise is quieter but still intrusive, the manual transmission's clutch will ruin your Achilles tendon in rush-hour traffic, and the Rubicon's around-town ride—though improved—is still flinty compared to car-based crossovers. Such are the trade-offs Jeep lovers willingly endure."

I know it's not a US test, but still significant for an "SUV of the Year." That the Wrangler gets a 1 star rating in NCAP Crash Test.

So articles like this matter tend to matter less to me as it seems to me like they are following the trend of almost all of the "independent" auto reviewers/journals. Take their opinion with a grain of salt.
 

·
Premium Member
2019 Crosstrek 2018 XT
Joined
·
14,142 Posts
We are talking SUV's what do you expect
More power less gas mileage..CAFE
I never once had a problem with my 08 with respect to "slowness"
Forester arguably does its job better than vehicle in its class
99+% of folks that are in the market for a Subaru type don't care. If they do they will buy an up scale 2.0+ turbo

Subaru may monitor this forum but they monitor more the sales and satisfaction of typical owners. They are on a roll with their car line

I almost never see an XT Forester on the road. And I actually look for them. I wonder why-not.

And what lowflier said about Motor Trend. I started reading Motor trend 57 years ago. They were out of touch then and they are more out of touch now.
 

·
Registered
2014 2.5i Limited CVT
Joined
·
1,731 Posts
Subaru may monitor this forum but they monitor more the sales and satisfaction of typical owners. They are on a roll with their car line

And what lowflier said about Motor Trend. I started reading Motor trend 57 years ago. They were out of touch then and they are more out of touch now.
Subaru IS on a roll. Sales keep getting better and better, more are on the road every day. Whether it is the safety aspects or the longevity [what's the tag line "more than 92% of Subarus sold in the last ten years are still on the road"..?]

And mags like Motor Trend and Car & Driver and R&T have been on a steady diet of Honda Kool-aid, Toyota taters and BMW bratwurst, finding most vehicles without the stylized H or T or the vaunted 3 letter propellor logo on the front or back are junk.

It seems that they cannot seem to realize the real world is much different than the 2 weeks they spend spinning around skidpads and kicking the quarter-mile.

The Forester is capable and I've never felt the need to quote Tim "the tool man" Taylor when driving around town or on the road ["more power - grunt-grunt-grunt].... Sure, a bit more torque or a few more ponies could be nice, but at what cost? If I want to impress folks with 0-60 times and quarter-mile drag numbers, I'd go buy a Porsche.
 

·
Registered
2015 Forester XT Touring cvt
Joined
·
1,081 Posts
We are talking SUV's what do you expect


Respect that you don’t feel the need for more power than the 2019 Forester, or your 08. And the enthusiast magazines do have other objectives. FWIW, I wouldn’t consider a Jeep of any flavor, at any time.

However, Subaru has and does produce better performing vehicles such as the WRX, the Ascent, the 3.6 Outback, or the late XT (which I own). So it’s not as if the company hasn’t thought about it, now and then.

IMO, the lethargic power plants in the Forester, Impreza, Crosstrek, 2.5 Outback, and the 2.5 Legacy are there because of overall CAFE requirements and Subaru’s decision not to develop a competitive hybrid or EV. And, by putting in CVTs tuned to be hyperactive at tip in they feel peppy in city traffic, which gives the illusion of performance where most owners feel it. However, they all howl and go nowhere when pushed at highway speeds. But that apparently isn’t enough to deter the hopelessly devoted, so it’s OK for many.

Not me, though.

EJ


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
2015 XT Premium CVT
Joined
·
2,859 Posts
A slow car has to have other attributes to make it fun. I had a previous generation Honda Fit I think 0 to 60 was 8.3. But I lowered it and it had one of the best 5 speed manual transmissions better than my Miata. It felt like a roller skate around corners and ramps.

I tried lowering my XT but does not have the same fun factor when it comes to handling.
 

·
Registered
2019 Forester Touring
Joined
·
825 Posts
We are talking SUV's what do you expect
More power less gas mileage..CAFE
Realistically speaking, I’d guess that the percentage of vehicle purchasers in the USA of passenger vehicles (not including trucks or other such vehicles that have a relatively limited number of manufacturers) staying with the same manufacturer, vehicle purchase after vehicle purchase, is extremely low. It’s just human nature to periodically want something different, and that’s given a big boost to the leased vehicle market.

So, yes, the most likely factor carrying the heaviest weight with manufacturers is the sales figure.

You can safely bet that if a manufacturer introduces a hideous neon pink and lime green striped vehicle that enjoys a record sales volume (and is panned by every car magazine reviewer), a similar color will show up in other manufacturers’ product lines.
 

·
Registered
2014 2.5i Limited CVT
Joined
·
1,731 Posts
So if you increase torque/hp, fewer will sell?
That's not what I'm saying at all. Taking a comment out of context doesn't work.

But if you increase hp & torque at the expense of, say, mpg - yes. You may lose sales. Or if you sacrafice reliability or longevity... You may lose sales.

Also, be aware of governmental issues of certification of major changes to engines...

Maybe we'll see the new 2.4 turbo from the Ascent in another 2 years.... Maybe we'll see the XT turbo motor from the SJ become a standard or even the 2.0 turbo from the WRX.... All are already certified for sale in the US. But that doesn't mean that the masses will buy them.

But as has been said in many other threads, the turbo [as the XT] was a lower volume seller and there was not a huge market for the motor.

Look at many posts throughout the forum of folks that want simpler or less complicated models to have less electronic bits that can fail. They opt for the simplest models - a base or premium with almost nothing on it. The other day, I saw an 80-something year old woman driving a Toyota 4x4 pick-up Xtra cab [back before they gained the Tacoma name] and probably keeps it going be ause it is so simple - a 4 pot motor and a 5 speed gear box.
 

·
Registered
2018 Touring CVT
Joined
·
173 Posts
I specifically bought my 2.5 for the drive train and economy, would it be slightly more fun to have more power under my right foot, sure sometimes... until I roll up to the pump and have to pay $1.40 per litre ($5.60 per gallon for my American friends). It isn't often I feel the need to go drag racing so 0 -60 in a couple more seconds isn't a huge deal. I replaced the rear sway with the 19mm so I don't think I would be able to go round a corner faster (safely) with more power. I wouldn't mind taking out a wrx for power/handling or XT for more power for fun but I would have to change my mind set on the price of that much fun.... just my opinion...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
277 Posts
as subaru enthusiasts, were expecting them to keep making fast cars, when the general population could care less about fast cars.
Slow cars = great fuel economy. Which in the end of the day, is going the be the best for humanity. decrease use of fossil fuels, cleaner airs, etc..

I was hoping their hybrid technology would get better, but subarus hybrid failed miserably.

i drive my xt like a grandma to get the best milage. ...kinda like the 19 forester. except the car is built that way.
 

·
Registered
2018 Forester XT
Joined
·
1,356 Posts
That's not what I'm saying at all. Taking a comment out of context doesn't work.
So you are assuming the worst....longevity will may be hampered along with economy? As you said, taking a comment out of context doesn't work. Regardless of sales...many objective reviews speak of the lack of performance as being disappointing...others speak of the aesthetics being disappointing for a new platform. I'm glad they are selling. That's great. I'm just disappointed in it overall (aesthetics and performance are my 2 musts)...as are many others. Sales are great though.
 

·
Registered
2014 2.5i Limited CVT
Joined
·
1,731 Posts
Fast does not equal enthusiasm. People are enthusiastic about VW bus and bugs and they are slower than dirt.

Not all who buy Sabaru are looking for speed. Many are looking for reliable and economical AWD vehicles to get fro here to there, carrying their dogs or mountain bikes or kayaks or _____ whatever.

The precursor to the Loyale [known as the DL and GL were not fast and built a legacy [pun not intended] that is still here 40 years later.

You want whip fast? Buy the WRX.
 

·
Registered
2015 XT Premium CVT
Joined
·
2,859 Posts
Even though the Crosstrek is slow I always look at it for several reasons. It offers a 6 speed transmission, different colors, roof rails, AWD and lowered would handle more like a car than my Forester. Downsides of course slow or under power, cargo room, and possible carbon build up.

But with the possibility of getting a orange, 6 speed, premium model for $20k has me going back and forth.
 

·
Registered
2014 2.5i Limited CVT
Joined
·
1,731 Posts
So you are assuming the worst....longevity will may be hampered along with economy? As you said, taking a comment out of context doesn't work. Regardless of sales...many objective reviews speak of the lack of performance as being disappointing...others speak of the aesthetics being disappointing for a new platform. I'm glad they are selling. That's great. I'm just disappointed in it overall (aesthetics and performance are my 2 musts)...as are many others. Sales are great though.
Didn't take your quote out of context - just deleted the quote-within-quote.

But let's look deeper into this ... how will you increase the horsepower and /or Torque? By remapping the ECU to provide more power? Well that didn't will require more fuel. That then hits your economy and makes it one or two or more miles per gallon less.

Would you increase your compression ratio or the heat of the burn in the cylinder? That then impacts your longevity and reliability because seals that were made for one set of pressures are now having to deal with a different set of pressures.

Adding a turbo isn't necessarily the answer either, see the comment about people wanting less complex engines.

Let's not mistake Ford's use of turbos across the entire product line as something about performance. It's not. It is about MPGs and about gas savings and having smaller engines power bigger vehicles.

If Ford wanted to continue with high-power motors, we would see the 5-liter and larger engines under the hood of just about anything that could take it. But in this generation and in this era we need smaller Motors with equivalent power bands as to what they're replacing.

I've owned turbocharged engines, I've also owned Italian sports sedans, European luxury cars, monster Metal Trucks, high-performance muscle cars, and almost every other type of vehicle out there.

Turbos require more maintenance. There is no refuting that fact. You're adding a part which requires more maintenance. That can be again another reason somebody might not want it. No matter how well advanced and how reliable turbos are, they are still nothing much more than aware item. You have rubber seals and metal bearings that break down over time.

Multi valve engines require more maintenance. Why? Because you have more valves and therefore more actuators and more components to operate those more valves.

Yes, we would all love to have the most power and torque available for the greatest fuel economy available. But you cannot have all of one and all of the other without a compromise.

Subaru chose to remove a low-volume model and engine from the lineup. As I have said in another post maybe we'll be lucky and we'll see the Turbo from the Ascent mid move its way down to the Forester. But that may be a few years away at least until Subaru knows how well the Ascent will sell and how many motors they need to keep up with demand to sell that many Ascents.
 

·
Registered
2015 Forester XT Touring cvt
Joined
·
1,081 Posts
I specifically bought my 2.5 for the drive train and economy, would it be slightly more fun to have more power under my right foot, sure sometimes... until I roll up to the pump and have to pay $1.40 per litre ($5.60 per gallon for my American friends). It isn't often I feel the need to go drag racing so 0 -60 in a couple more seconds isn't a huge deal. I replaced the rear sway with the 19mm so I don't think I would be able to go round a corner faster (safely) with more power. I wouldn't mind taking out a wrx for power/handling or XT for more power for fun but I would have to change my mind set on the price of that much fun.... just my opinion...


Makes sense when fuel is that high. But, as someone has already posted, it isn’t just 0-60, although that matters. It’s whether the vehicle is engaging to drive, or not. I had more fun with my smallish, fairly low hp cars and hatchbacks with slick manuals than some newer, hulking but high hp vehicles. But, I have to laugh a bit when companies like Subaru ( and many others) dress up a base model with some cheap colored plastic, different paint, and a few additional lights and blacked out wheels and sell it up priced as the “Sport” model. Meanwhile it’s no sportier to drive than the base, but more profit for the seller.

Of course this is just my personal preference, but the worst combination for killing all driving fun is pairing a small engine with a CVT. There is just no way to make that engaging. The combo usually results in a lot of engine noise, no real sense of movement, and no play possibilities at all. It’s just cheap, basic transport. Or in the case of some Subaru models, not particularly cheap, but still the same outcome. I am talking Impreza and Crosstrek, even Legacy and Outback, with the base engines, really. Point A to Point B. That’s fine, if that is what you want or what your budget demands. I’ve been there.

I like a happy medium, with a peppy, normally aspirated engine (could be a 4 or a small 6) paired with a six or eight speed automatic. Most unfortunately, Subaru doesn’t sell any of those. Seven or eight years ago I would have said a slick manual, but not these days. I would forego the turbo. Unfortunately with Subaru, as well as many other makers, you either get the base doggy engine or maybe a turbo option, with the usual turbo lag, slow warmup issues, and often a thirst for premium. One prominent outlier is the 3.6r Outback or the Legacy, which are quite different, even great to drive in the Subaru family.

Plus all of that additional turbo mechanical stuff to break, as the just previous poster has lamented.

EJ


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
2018 Forester XT
Joined
·
1,356 Posts
Didn't take your quote out of context - just deleted the quote-within-quote.
Why do you think Turbo sales are increasing year after year? You're acting like everyone wants soccer mom vehicles because Subaru has sales. Moreover, I've owned 3 Turbos now and haven't really noticed any significant increase in maintenance.

In the end, you are defending your choice for personal reasons. As am I.
 

·
Registered
2019 Forester Touring
Joined
·
825 Posts
Why do you think Turbo sales are increasing year after year?
Are they?

In what context? Is that all the manufacturer offers in their product line?

Can you show a supporting source to back up that assertion?

Not trying to contradict anyone, but establishing drive train combinations is pretty complex, and most likely not driven by the buying public demanding turbocharged engines.

If Subaru only offered turbocharged engines in Foresters, for example, then lots more Subaru vehicles would be sold with turbocharged engines. But that would hardly mean they sold because the buying public was demanding turbocharged engines.

I don’t think you can buy a new non-turbocharged BMW 3 or 4 series vehicle today, but that’s not because all customers are demanding them. The majority of those buyers probably don’t even know their engines are turbocharged...

It’s a complex situation, not easily explained by simple explanations.
 
1 - 20 of 41 Posts
Top