Subaru Forester Owners Forum banner

1 - 20 of 37 Posts

·
Registered
2014 Forester Limited+NAV cvt
Joined
·
123 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
this is a genuine question I have, not a troll, not an insult not an attack or whatever else you might be thinking.
I started looking into buying a new SUV at the beginning of the year and eventually settled on the 2014 forester. I am very happy with it.
I selected it and then confirmed my selection when consumer reports gave it a great review.
eventually I bought one in June when I couldn't wait any longer for the configuration I really wanted and didn't want to wait up to 4 months for a touring with eyesight in Red (HAD TO BE RED).
here is my question.
I considered the outback, test drove it etc.
I didn't see any advantage of the outback over the forester. I thought the forester was far superior. Consumer reports agreed also.
however around the San Francisco bay area I probably see 80% outbacks versus 20% foresters of the new unplated Subaru's I see as I drive around.
why is that ? what do people see in the outback that I didn't see ?
I honestly couldn't see any advantage for me.
 

·
Registered
2014 2.5i Premium CVT
Joined
·
65 Posts
Probably just personal preference, frankly, and "keeping up with the Jones's".

Like you, I looked at the Outback, Forester, and Crosstrek and quickly came to the conclusion that the Forester offered the best bang for my buck. That, of course, is a pretty subjective opinion as the Outback and Crosstrek are really, really nice. But when it came down to it, the Premium I bought matched up pretty well to the Outback and I liked the larger windows.

I used to live in Walnut Creek, out in the East Bay and still visit family, twice a year but honestly don't recall seeing a lot of Sub's. Probably just wasn't looking.

Again, probably just personal preference and people trying to "keep up" with each other.

Thanks
Paul

(Of course, I re-read my post and it's pretty subjective!)
 

·
Registered
2014 2.5i Premium CVT
Joined
·
65 Posts
I am kind of obsessive about noticing everything that goes on around me, including models of cars
and since I drive slow, I see a lot of vehicle pass me !!!!!!
:icon_razz::icon_razz::icon_razz: That's pretty funny. Like you, I drive around 55-60 on the freeways ... and in SoCal that gets you some nasty looks but I'm having a lot of fun seeing how much MPG I can eeck out of my Forester. When I walk around the parking garage at work, there don't seem to be a lot of Subaru's ... I think I've counted three other ... max.
 

·
Registered
2010 Forester XT
Joined
·
54 Posts
the Outback is slightly more luxurious, but

I drive a 2010 Forester XT. The trim is chintzy and the sound deadening non-existant. Nevertheless, after installation of a thicker rear sway bar, I love this car. It is fun to drive, handles my skis and kayaks with a versatile roof rack, and was a great buy. If you want a commuter car, the Outback may suit your needs. For outdoor lifestyles, the Forester is great.
 

·
Registered
2014 2.5i Premium CVT
Joined
·
105 Posts
around the San Francisco bay area I probably see 80% outbacks versus 20% foresters... why is that?
Here the ratio seems similar. I suspect the 3.6 accounts for some of it, likewise the Outback's essential wagon-ness; people wanting that configuration don't have many other options at a sub-premium price point.

MSRP aside, the Outback enjoys a certain caché shared with the Volvo VX70 and Audi Allroad: SUV versatility in a more svelte package, and less ubiquitous than a Lexus/BMW/Mercedes. The Outback says you're discerning but practical, and not necessarily moving with the flock.

And yes, what a car says tends to be important in coastal California. :wink: :cool: :icon_rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
2012 Forester Automatic
Joined
·
7 Posts
Like you I also considered an Outback when I was looking at Subaru vehicles. I chose the Forester because the internal space was a lot more user friendly (better able to take boxes, cartons etc) and I wanted a more general purpose vehicle than a car like wagon offers.

After almost 12 months my opinion hasn't changed and I am still impressed with the Forester and it's versatility.

Here in NZ Subaru are a very popular vehicle with the full range in evidence on the roads. Also we have strong sales of used Japanese imports and not unsurprisingly, the Forester enjoys strong sales. Especially the turbo version.
 

·
Registered
2009 Forester XT Auto
Joined
·
26 Posts
From owning both vehicle, the Outback was a fabulous car in every aspect.. and when I sold it (cause someone gave me damn near double the going price for it) I damn near shead a tear watching it drive away. Now I am in a Forester and thinking I may trade this one in on a brand new one. The difference between the 2 are the Outback is more car like (wagon if you will) it had a very good offroadish ability, and was a lot of fun. It had lots of space, comfortable seating, and did everything I asked it to.. including some RallyX events. The Forester is taller, more headroom, is also very comfortable, you get a much better view of the road.

Outback = Wagon
Forester = SUV/Crossover
 

·
Registered
2008 XT Sport 5 MT
Joined
·
213 Posts
I test drove an OB, 08 Premium 5MT, and liked it enough. Had a horrible time close quarter maneuvering however (such a long wheel base), but almost bought it until my 08 FSXT 5MT, Canadian so it was fully loaded with all black leather, heated everything showed up, and just blew me away. I overpaid a bit since I wanted so badly it was obvious. OB is no good for any real offroading due to wheel base.
 

·
Registered
2014 forester cvt
Joined
·
1 Posts
this is a genuine question I have, not a troll, not an insult not an attack or whatever else you might be thinking.
I started looking into buying a new SUV at the beginning of the year and eventually settled on the 2014 forester. I am very happy with it.
I selected it and then confirmed my selection when consumer reports gave it a great review.
eventually I bought one in June when I couldn't wait any longer for the configuration I really wanted and didn't want to wait up to 4 months for a touring with eyesight in Red (HAD TO BE RED).
here is my question.
I considered the outback, test drove it etc.
I didn't see any advantage of the outback over the forester. I thought the forester was far superior. Consumer reports agreed also.
however around the San Francisco bay area I probably see 80% outbacks versus 20% foresters of the new unplated Subaru's I see as I drive around.
why is that ? what do people see in the outback that I didn't see ?
I honestly couldn't see any advantage for me.
I was thrill to get my 2.5i forester touring. The dealer I got my forester made a mistake ordering forester. It was supposed to be two weeks but it took them 1 month and half and still could get my car in. Finally, I had enough so I went back to the dealer and demand my deposit back. Luckily, there was a marine blue 2.5i touring with eyesight in the lot. They asked me if I want to get the touring with eyesight. I said I will take if it is the same price for the vehicle I ordered. The salesman would not bouge and I told the salesman, I just want my deposit back, I will go get myself a honda accord. Then salesman went back to get my deposit, somehow he came back and said to me. What can I do to earn your business. I offered the salesman $31000 for the car. He went back for short time and came back and shake my hand and said I got a deal. Do you think I paid to much for my 2014 forester 2.5i touring with eyesight.
 

·
Smooshed FOTY 2011
2005 Lifted 2.5 XT 5-Speed MT Dual-Range
Joined
·
5,732 Posts
Outbacks are bigger, offer the larger 3.6 engine, and are roomier inside. And to be honest, I think in the right trim, they can look better than the new Foresters as well. (This coming from someone who HATED the Redesigned Outback when it first came out)

Got to drive the 2012 model extensively when I did the commercial for Subaru, and I liked it. They've since tweaked it and it's even more comfortable I would say.

But yes. I do see more Outbacks with dealer tags driving around here than Foresters. But I also see a lot more older Outbacks driving around as well.
 

·
Registered
2006 Forester XT Limited 5 Speed Manual
Joined
·
524 Posts
I offered the salesman $31000 for the car. He went back for short time and came back and shake my hand and said I got a deal. Do you think I paid to much for my 2014 forester 2.5i touring with eyesight.
Well, MSRP for the touring w/ eyesight was $33.2k. You did get it under MSRP, but I think in your position, I think you should have gotten it at the price for the car you had intended on purchasing.
 

·
Registered
2006 Forester XT Limited 5 Speed Manual
Joined
·
524 Posts
Well, with my current forester starting to show its age, I'm on the fence on what to replace it with. As it is, my forester is already a tight fit in my garage, but I find myself needing more cargo space. I also really enjoy how easy it is to park and maneuvor my forester, expecially when backing. I've thought about replacing it with an impreza sport or XV, but then again, I'll be in the same spot needing more cargo room. I do travel with kayaks on the roof at times, and having the longer wheel base outback makes more sense. I also like that the new ones are much quieter and more comfortable for road trips compared to my forester. With my yearly average miles on my car have dropped from 30K a year to just 5K, I think I will have plenty of time to make the final decision.
 

·
Registered
2008 Forester AE
Joined
·
1,723 Posts
Forester is about utility, Outback is about comfort. Diff'rent strokes..

Look at their past models, Forester was based on the Impreza where the Outbacks are Legacys.
 

·
Premium Member
12 Premium 5-speed
Joined
·
4,486 Posts
Why Outback? My '09 Outback is easier to load than our new-to-us '12 Forester. Lower lift-over height and all that. Given my ~75 lb toolbox, those extra inches do matter. It's also a lot quieter, which is important on those 6-hour drives to visit customers (I'm looking at a 1,300-mile drive, one-way, in a couple months). Comfort is a wash - they're both comfy in different ways, though the OBs longer wheelbase does reduce the 'chop' over rough pavement; 5 miles of patched expansion strips can drive you nuts in the wrong vehicle.

So why not the Forester? Because it may not be the best vehicle for the way a person intends to use it.
 

·
Registered
2014 Forester XT Touring CVT
Joined
·
12 Posts
We looked at them both, and really considered both. I really love the Outback, great car but living in the city it felt too long for us. I love the 3.6 motor, its smooth as butter and has a great powerband. Outbacks really are nice vehicles but we like the taller height and as others had pointed out even though the Outback is longer the Forster seems to have more useable space with the seats down
 

·
Premium Member
'21 ISM Crosstrek Limited
Joined
·
1,175 Posts
Outbacks - for people who care most about what people think about them.

Foresters - for people who care most about what a vehicle can do for them.

:biggrin:
 
1 - 20 of 37 Posts
Top