Topic: Test Drive: 2010 Subaru Forester 2.5X PZEV

[Autos_Editor]

Subaru has added its greenhouse-gas-limiting technology to the 2010 Forester, helping it to run "90 per cent cleaner than the average new vehicle," reports Contributing Editor, Chris Chase. But that doesn't change its performance or fuel economy, he notes.

Read More...

[pishtosh]

My cousin recommended this blog and she was totally right keep up the fantastic work!

[Shnak]

helping it to run "90 per cent cleaner than the average new vehicle,"

Is that even true? I've heard that other car makers have very similar technology than Subaru's PZEV but just don't advertise it or put a nice little sticker on the back of their car. Anyone knows?

[mikemcm]

Please help me understand why Subaru sells both the 'standard' 2.5l engine as well as a PZEV engine.  They appear to be the same in output and now I learn the gas mileage is the same.  Why not just make'em all PZEV?

Probably costs, states like California and New York require the PZEV while others don't. The pzev costs extra. I would take the outback over the forester. Nice car.

[5 Wheel Drive]

"Note that while PZEV cars run cleaner than their standard Subaru counterparts, they don’t use less gasoline. As such, my PZEV tester’s fuel consumption ratings were the same 10.4/7.7 L/100 km as for the non-PZEV Forester automatic. In city driving, I averaged 11 L/100 km, a number I suspect would have been lower in a fully broken-in car (my tester had about 1,700 km on it)."

Our '09 was up in the 11's and 12's when it was brand new.  After it's first oil change at 6000km's, and once it got a little closer to 10,000km's it got noticibly better.  We regularily get around 10 L/100km's in a mix of city highway.   Not sure how they rated it at 7.7 for the highway.  I've gotten low 8's on long trips.  I don't think I've ever seen it go into the 7's.

[Dan]

Good review and I agree that the Forester is a great small SUV but it just need to be a little more fine tuned in order for it to take on the big dogs aka the popular small SUV's. They need to update the engine by giving it at least one more gear, re-design the dash area so its not over powered by the vents and make the seats more comfortable with good lumbar support (Honda has great seats hint hint Subaru). As for the size I love it because its not too big and not that small either its a good size after all it is a compact SUV. I hate how every year it seems like everyone has to balloon the size of their vehicles...or you can be like GM and make a mid sized Terrain and call is a compact SUV lol.....I just hope Subaru listens to the consumers and address and polish up the few complaints.

[Roger]

"...what it needs now is an updated transmission."

Absolutely. A six speed manual. You know, for those of us that like to...unhhh... actually drive.

To its credit, Sube still offers MTs in much of their product line. Kudos.

[aknutson]

A nice looking little CUV, but it sacrifices power and MPG's for the all-the-time AWD system. There are several other crossovers that offer the slip-and-grip AWD systems and have V6's that achieve similar mileage, but there is something to be said for the Subie's ability to handle bad weather. I wonder how this would perform with a stick shift and the WRX's 265-hp engine? Hmmmm. Regardless, PZEV sounds like a great technology. It's much more affordable than a hybrid system and I would hazard a guess that it's actually better for the environment overall because there is no battery issues.

[5 Wheel Drive]

"I wonder how this would perform with a stick shift and the WRX's 265-hp engine?"

I'd be at my Subaru dealer so fast...   

[mikemcm]

Regardless, PZEV sounds like a great technology. It's much more affordable than a hybrid system and I would hazard a guess that it's actually better for the environment overall because there is no battery issues.

Not sure what you mean by more affordable than a hybrid system. Do you mean in reducing CO2? PZEV is just for nox and sox's, it won't do anything for CO2. CO2 is all about mpg. I don't know how PZEV differs from Honda's ULEV but I think ULEV has been around for quite awhile.

O.K, I looked it up PZEV is a higher standard than ULEV. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ULEV

[BernardP]

PZEV is basically a California emission standard:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PZEV

It aims to reduce pollutants. This has very little to do with greenhouse gases, the main ones being carbon dioxide (CO2) and water vapor (H2O)

CO2 is not a pollutant. In fact, perfect combustion of hydrocarbon fuel - combination of carbon (C) and hydrogen (H) with oxygen (O), would result in water vapor (H2O) and carbon dioxide (CO2). Water vapor is the main greenhouse gas.

Ironically, processes implemented to reduce pollutants, such as oxydes of nitrogen (NOx) and carbon monoxyde (CO) will also increase CO2 and H2O production.

So, the PZEV standard helps to reduce pollutants, but has no effet on greenhouse gases. People who think that they are fighting global warming by driving a PZEV car are mistaken. The way to reduce greenhouse gases is to reduce fuel consumption, which directly reduces the production of H2O and CO2.

Although it's important to reduce pollutants and our consumption of non-renewable energy sources, those who follow the evolution of the global warming debate can see that this whole theory is currently crumbling fast.

One of the best sites to follow the action:

http://wattsupwiththat.com/

[saint_satan]

This is a great little vehicle.  I toyed with the idea of buying one.  My two beefs are that in the 2.5l variation, this vehicle is slow.  Probably was a mistake to drive a V6 Rav4 immediately before it.  The other compliant is the dealer network.  I live in the northern part of the GTA and its at least a half hour drive to the nearest dealer - and that franchise is VERY sketchy (a decrepid industrial unit with a couple of creaky service bay doors).

Subaru would do well to increase its presence and visibility.

[Mozeby]

"I wonder how this would perform with a stick shift and the WRX's 265-hp engine?"

I'd be at my Subaru dealer so fast...   

There used to be a manual turbo Forester several years back.  I remember a test drive from Car and Driver (or maybe Motor Trend) that recorded 0-60 in under 6 sec.  Too bad it was the ugly square box version.

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/car/03q3/subaru_forester_2.5xt-road_test

[Trainman]

I will throw my thoughts into this:

I have a 2009 Touring, with the AT, bought with 6 kms in September 2008.  Currently has just over 55,000 kms.

I have had no warranty work to date.

Fuel economy has averaged around 9.3 l/100kms, for mostly highway driving.  Have seen a few tanks under 8 but not many.

The AT seems well suited to the motors characteristics but I agree that another gear would be nice, allowing the ratios to be mixed up a bit better.  It has a few neat features like being able to lock the front/rear torque distribution to 50/50; as well as 3 different shift modes (normal/economy, sport and manual).

As far as pep goes, I have no issues with what it does for me.  Just got to be willing to use the the upper part of the rpm range.  And this is helped by the easy to use manual shift mode of the AT.  Also helps to understand that the AT does not respond well to "flooring" it but gives much better response by tipping into the throttle a bit before hammering it.  A weird quirk for sure and takes a bit of getting used to.

I also do not have any issues with interior room.  It seems better than the 2002 Nissan Pathfinder it replaced, especially the rear seat area and rear cargo area.

Stereo is a matter of choice; again I have no desire to replace mine but then I am not an audiophile by any stretch.

I found Mr. Chase's comments on the suspension interesting.  I again have no issues.  i do not find it floaty, nor is the body roll an issue for me.  I have pushed it and it really likes to be pushed.

It is wicked fast on gravel roads.  You need to keep attention or you will find yourself going much faster than you intended.  Very "stuck" and stable in the looser stuff.

It is actually very decent off-road, with generous ground clearance (just under 9") and underbody stuff like exhaust items tucked up well away from potential harm.

I noticed as far as the seat comments, no mention of too low a passenger seat, this was an issue in the 09's.  Did this get fixed I wonder?

Overall I am very happy with my choice and would buy again.