Topic: Used Vehicle Review: Subaru Forester, 2003-2008

[saint_satan]

Johngenx:

I don't want to be a defender of most Chryco crap, but my experience with Jeep has been reasonably positive.  I've never been left stranded and I don't consider them to be "crap" in terms of reliability.  I do consider them to be "crap" in terms of fuel economy, ride, on-road manners,  handling and cramped quarters.  I bet more folks have given up their Cherokees, Libertys and Wranglers for the reasons I have outlined moreso than unreliable powertrains.

I find it interesting than Consumer Reports ranks Subaru high in reliability when imperical evidence is to the contrary (reputation before statistics?). 

BTW, if the new Forester could pull 2500 lbs., I would strongly consider one...

[johngenx]

I've had/got quite a few chums with TJ/Wrangler Jeeps, and the drivelines are pretty durable, but they've had tons of other problems.  Poor fuel economy and lack of interior space are probably the two top reasons for abandonment of the Jeeps, with lack of refinement a distance third.

One of my friends keeps late 90's TJ his for occasional off-road shenanigans, but is somewhat frustrated by problems with the instrument panels, wipers, HVAC difficulties, and other electrical problems that seem to get solved, only to come back.  He's had some mechanical problems, but he's also very hard on it when it does venture out, so I'm sure most of that is due to abuse, and not build quality.

CR rates Subaru highly because in reality, the response rate for most problems is low.  Subaru forums are biased (like all brand specific) thanks to the people with the problems posting.  As an example, I rarely post at the Forester forum, because I rarely have problems!

[Trainman]

...

I find it interesting than Consumer Reports ranks Subaru high in reliability when imperical evidence is to the contrary (reputation before statistics?). 

BTW, if the new Forester could pull 2500 lbs., I would strongly consider one...

My 09 is rated for 2,400 lbs towing, as long as the trailer has brakes.  It is higher in other markets BTW.

As for the high reliability rating, its not just CR but TrueDelta also shows the Forester as being highly reliable.  So I would say its the reverse, that stats are before reputation.

Getting reliability info from internet forums is rather a poor way to do it as its the issues that get posted.  Very few post "I got no issues" as its a rather boring post, with little meaning.

So far I am very happy with mine.  It has had less issues than our Sienna at the same kms.

[saint_satan]

rrocket:

I do find it ironic that nobody would write a bad word about Toyota for years and now they are second last in JD Power surveys - after all the debacles.  My father, who is a car man of 40 years, has been telling me that the last 5 years Ford has come a long way - the press is now catching on.

To be honest, the only unrelaible car I ever owned was my '84 Camaro.  Everything else has been decent to fantastic - domestics and imports alike.  Maybe I'm just lucky....

[johngenx]

Toyota still ranks high in the CR world, though they are having a lot of trouble keeping "above average" in the ratings for most of their cars.

One reason is that in general, ALL cars are light years ahead in terms of reliability.  The "age of fuel injection" beginning in the late 80's launched the era, with OBD-II standards/mandated warranties and general investment in build quality really brought things along as 2000 came.  But, even in the late 90's, there were still makes struggling, but the gap was closing.  Jet forward 10 years, and the days of paint that peels in less than two years, engines that struggle to last 150K, and so on, are coming to a thankful end.

Toyota's quality is not improving at the same rate as other makes.  It's a game of declining marginal returns.  Subaru was a make that had some issues in the late 90's, and has managed to constantly improve over the last 10-12 years.  Ford?  Holy crap!  Talk about a steep curve!

Toyota cars, like most cars on the road today, are marvels of reliability.  The problem at Toyota is not build quality.  Long term ownership data still shows them doing very well.  Their problem is mojo.  I thought that the acquisition of Subaru would help inject some needed enthusiasm into the product line, but it has yet to materialize.

Subaru's line if filled with great stuff.  They lack products to compete with the Fit, Corolla (The Impreza is not really there, it's kinda on its own) or any hybrid models, but the Forester is great value compared to the CR-V or RAV-4, the WRX and STi are category killers and the Legacy is a great alternative to an Accord/Camry, netiehr of which offer AWD.  (Fusion is a strong product there!!)

Thinking about the future of Subaru, they need to keep the AWD differentiation going, but should try to add fuel economy to their arsenal of weapons.  It would help crack non-snowbelt markets and ensure viability in all markets with the potential of high gas prices.  I had also thought the relationship with Toyota would help there.  Toyota currently coaxes ridiculous fuel economy out of engines.  Subaru sits with Mazda in a seeming inability to design engine management systems that produce a great combination of power and economy.

The Forester 2.0D is sold in Yurp, and we need it here.  NOW!!!  VW has proven that Canadians will buy diesels in good numbers...

[saint_satan]

On Subaru and fuel economy - I suspect the fuel economy issue has as much to do with weight and rolling resistance as anything else.  AWD will create both.  If you want to play, you have to pay!

[johngenx]

On Subaru and fuel economy - I suspect the fuel economy issue has as much to do with weight and rolling resistance as anything else.  AWD will create both.  If you want to play, you have to pay!

The diesel Forester is about the same as a Corolla for fuel economy.

[Thinking Out Loud]

On Subaru and fuel economy - I suspect the fuel economy issue has as much to do with weight and rolling resistance as anything else.  AWD will create both.  If you want to play, you have to pay!

The diesel Forester is about the same as a Corolla for fuel economy.

What would it be compared to a diesel Corolla, tho?   

[johngenx]

Honestly, not sure how much better a diesel Corolla will do.  We consistently see around 7.0 in congested all city driving and around 5.0 on the highway.  How much better is a TDI VW?  Toyota's newest small gasoline engines are pretty amazing for fuel economy.

[Trainman]

On Subaru and fuel economy - I suspect the fuel economy issue has as much to do with weight and rolling resistance as anything else.  AWD will create both.  If you want to play, you have to pay!

Then why does Consumer Reports show that the Forester gets equal or better fuel mileage as a CR-V and RAV4 (in base engine trim)?  No real hit in fuel for the AWD vs the slip'n grip systems from their real world experience.  With aggressive AT tires, and driving BC's hilly roads, I have averaged 9.3l/100 kms over the 23 months of ownership.

EDIT: here is the CR data, from their Buying Guide 2010:

Forester X MT: 24 MPG (US data for all)
Forester X AT: 22
Forester XT (turbo, AT only): 20

RAV4 base 4 cyl: 23
RAV4 V6: 22

CR-V: 21

And some others for fun:

Outlander 4 cyl: 22
Rogue: 22
Escape Hybrid: 26
Escape V6: 19
Escape 4 cyl: 21
Sportage V6: 18
Tuscon V6: 18
Liberty: 16
Nitro: 16
Patriot and Compass: 22

No CR data for other variants of the above.

With the exception of the Liberty and Nitro, all are very competitive as far as fuel use goes.

So tell me again how Subaru's AWD suffers in fuel consumption in the Forester?   

[mrthompson]

Nice! 

[SJP]

johngenx

"Honestly, not sure how much better a diesel Corolla will do.  We consistently see around 7.0 in congested all city driving and around 5.0 on the highway.  How much better is a TDI VW?  Toyota's newest small gasoline engines are pretty amazing for fuel economy"

I agree, VW has no problem selling diesels because their gas counterparts have never been terribly fuel efficient, so if you want a VW, the choice is easy. I have always thought that diesels would be perfect in small or medium SUV's, for increased fuel economy plus some better/easier towing.

Car and driver had a euro CIVIC coupe a year or so ago, and it didn't get any better mileage than the gas version. The diesel was a big one for the car(more accord sized), and they figured a smaller diesel would have been an improvement, but in a small fuel efficient vehicle, the gains are smaller with diesels. They are there, but harder to justify the price difference. In Europe it makes sense, because from hat I have been told, diesel is taxed different, so enjoys a big price difference as well.

[johngenx]

The Forester is very competitive in terms of fuel economy within its class, but I'd love to see a Forester that competes with Corollas and other fuel sipping compacts.  Subaru AWD, cargo space AND 5.xL/100km?   

I'm not sure why Subaru feels Canadians wouldn't buy diesels.  We do when badged VW or Mercedes.  The Subaru owners I know bought Subarus not only for their superior AWD systems, but also for the relative fuel economy compared to SUVs.

[SJP]

Forester with a diesel would be FANTASTIC!!! I had a 2003 RAV4, and always wished for the 40+mpg diesel version they had in europe. Same with my Mazda 5, they had two diesel choices in Europe with 6 speed manual. That makes me drool!!!! But as it stands, Subarus are quite competitive as far as fuel economy go, I think whoever brought the first well priced diesel compact SUV to Canada would have a hit. Subaru would be  the logical choice, as kind of a quirky go against the flow kind of company.

[SJP]

"Toyota's quality is not improving at the same rate as other makes."

As a long time Toyota owner, I agree. I have been saying for the last 5-7 years, that Toyota, and to a lesser extent, Honda, have been resting on their reputation, while some other manufacturers(especially Ford) have made huge strides. Toyota especially simply lost their way, go too big too fast, and let greed cloud their judgement. Smart, lower volume companies can still be profitable, and produce great vehicles.

[chrischasescars]

I'm not sure why Subaru feels Canadians wouldn't buy diesels.  We do when badged VW or Mercedes. 

They buy German diesels because the cars they're installed in are viewed as upscale. The automakers know that diesel won't take in NA if they're only available in "regular" cars. The tech has to be viewed and accepted as "premium" so that it can trickle down to mid- and lower-priced vehicles.