Topic: First Drive: 2011 Subaru Forester

[tpl]

Go the whole hog with it... a 6 or 7 speed DSG.

[Dante]

It's pretty well known that the next Forester will have a CVT. Keep dreaming about a 6,7 -speed A/T or DSG Forester.

[John MacDonald]

I agree that the 4 speed tranny is a deal breaker for most, but the deal breaker for me was that it only makes 170 HP.  I'm sorry but they need to start offering more powerful 4 cylinders...

You mean like the Subaru Forester XT?

No I mean more like out of the Nissan Juke, VW Tiguan, or even the same as the Toyota Venza.  Even the same out of the 2011 Sonata would be great for a 4 cylinder.  The XT doesn't have enough power to satisfy either.  If I want the upgraded engine I want more power and refinement, and if I want a 4 cylinder I want good power plus good fuel economy.  The basic 4 in the Forester doesn't have the right balance of power or fuel economy.

[John MacDonald]

I'm sorry but they need to start offering more powerful 4 cylinders because everyone else is offering them with more HP and the upgraded engine isn't all that great either.  The upgraded engine needs to be a minimum of 250hp. 

Do you mean from a bragging right the more the better sort of way or actual performance?  The previous gen Forester XT, with the same engine and turbo had the same if not better acceleration times the the same generation Mustang and F-body camaro.  Not bad for a paltry 224hp.  Good power-to-weight ratio, good gearing and plenty of traction showed that HP isn't the be-all-end-all for performance.

If it was 2005 then sure the power out of the XT would be fine.  But now a plain old Toyota Rav4 V6 will eat it's lunch.  I'm pretty sure my 2010 Santa Fe would also beat it to 100 km and also beat it in the 80-120 passing test.  It's not bragging rights it's the ability to merge/pass without having you foot to the floor to do so.

[John MacDonald]

It's pretty well known that the next Forester will have a CVT. Keep dreaming about a 6,7 -speed A/T or DSG Forester.

That's really sad that Subaru thinks the only way to improve fuel economy is by putting a CVT in.  I really think all manufacturers should take a note out of Hyundai.  They are offering new vehicles (Sonata, in all forms but especially the hybrid, and upcoming Elantra) with traditional 6 speed tranny's and still getting fantastic fuel economy.  Sure Subaru is working from a disadvantage what with every vehicle being full time AWD but there are options out there.  Making a vehicle lighter, smaller displacement engine with direct injection/turbo charging, bringing over one of those fantastic diesels they have in Europe.  All they have to do is realize that CVT's completely kill any sporty feel of the vehicle and that there are other ways to get fuel economy better.

[sailor723]

CVT= Crossed off my list

[BernardP]

It can be expected that this new engine will spread across the range. It's disappointing that with DOHC instead of SOHC, Subaru couldn't extract more power from it.

Rumors of Subaru working on Direct Fuel Injection have been circulating for a couple of years. I guess it's what this engine needs to gain more HP/torque (Turbo doesn't count...)

The Legacy refresh is due for the 2013 MY. It would be a good opportunity to add DFI to the new 2.5L engine.

[Emmo]

I'm not in the market, but have driven a "new" 09 Forester and would buy one. Why? The usual Sube attributes but, among the most important? A manual transmission. I have no interest in 4, 5 6, 10 speed autos or CVT. Just give me the simplicity and direct engagement of a MT. Good on Sube for still offering the MT- the difference between pointing a car and actually driving it.

[Alex]

CVT= Crossed off my list

CVTs will die (again), just like the automatic seatbelts died. Funny that, this will NOT be Subaru's first CVT.... 1990 Justy (though may not have made it with CVT into North America).

And _I_ have crossed Forester off my list because of the head gasket issues, from what I read still happening to 2007 and newer.

Otherwise - lovely vehicle.

[Roy]

...now a plain old Toyota Rav4 V6 will eat it's lunch.  I'm pretty sure my 2010 Santa Fe would also beat it to 100 km and also beat it in the 80-120 passing test.  It's not bragging rights it's the ability to merge/pass without having you foot to the floor to do so.

Uh, no and no. 

The Rav4 V6 is comparable to the XT in acceleration - both around mid-high 6 for 0-60mph. The Sana Fe V6 does worse than both.  And if its not bragging rights but the ability to pass, and the XT acclerates as fast/is comparable as the Rav4 V6....then the engine must be adequate if you felt the Rav4 is adequate?  Simple A=B; B=C; A=C logic.  The strike against the XT is the premium fuel requirement in my book.

[Roy]

Good on Sube for still offering the MT- the difference between pointing a car and actually driving it.

Except for the XT

[John MacDonald]

...now a plain old Toyota Rav4 V6 will eat it's lunch.  I'm pretty sure my 2010 Santa Fe would also beat it to 100 km and also beat it in the 80-120 passing test.  It's not bragging rights it's the ability to merge/pass without having you foot to the floor to do so.

Uh, no and no. 

The Rav4 V6 is comparable to the XT in acceleration - both around mid-high 6 for 0-60mph. The Sana Fe V6 does worse than both.  And if its not bragging rights but the ability to pass, and the XT acclerates as fast/is comparable as the Rav4 V6....then the engine must be adequate if you felt the Rav4 is adequate?  Simple A=B; B=C; A=C logic.  The strike against the XT is the premium fuel requirement in my book.

I guess that AWD system must really help it to 100km's becasue it's not all that light.  I would have considered test driving one but when I was shopping the XT only came in manual and my wife is not a fan.  Still it makes me wonder why they didn't get the engine up to the 265 HP mark like the WRX.  I'm sure it wouldn't take much work and not that much more money.  The performance would offset the loss of fuel economy I think too. 

[northsparrow]

Well said EMMO.

Subaru should be commended for keeping a manual available on a small All Wheel Drive SUV. This is something that Toyota and Honda have dropped from the RAV4 and CRV.

Owners will  benefit from the long overdue end of the timing belt era assuming that this generation of engine has fixed historic gasket issues.

On the subject of diesels, will anyone other than VW ever bring a 4 cylinder diesel to North America?  A Forester  diesel in Europe is capable of 48 mpg on the highway which would be  a very attractive selling point.

[sailor723]

CVT= Crossed off my list

CVTs will die (again), just like the automatic seatbelts died. Funny that, this will NOT be Subaru's first CVT.... 1990 Justy (though may not have made it with CVT into North America).

And _I_ have crossed Forester off my list because of the head gasket issues, from what I read still happening to 2007 and newer.

Otherwise - lovely vehicle.

Those Justys did in fact have CVT's......and they were un-serviceable when things went wrong (and they OFTEN did). I can remember at least a couple that came back just over 100K with no warranty and no transmission. The only fix was to replace the entire tranny.

[5 Wheel Drive]

I'm not in the market, but have driven a "new" 09 Forester and would buy one. Why? The usual Sube attributes but, among the most important? A manual transmission. I have no interest in 4, 5 6, 10 speed autos or CVT. Just give me the simplicity and direct engagement of a MT. Good on Sube for still offering the MT- the difference between pointing a car and actually driving it.

A manual gearbox and price are the 2 biggest reason's we chose the Forester over the CR-V.   

[Hampton Wicks]

Okay TIME OUT here.

So it's an outdated 4 speed. But be careful what you wish for - they could slap in the CVT in here and then what? Given a choice I'm very happy to have the 4 speed thank you.

CVT - been there and no like. Sure a five or six speed would be nice and people would die for it however the thought of them putting in a CVT really scares me. One small step - the engine, next year maybe the tranny.

Like or no like, a CVT Forester is on the way. Expect to see it in the 2013 model year.

[Cris]

Dont't fix it if it aint broke!
I spoke to my dealer recently.  I asked him why the 2011 Foresters were so late.  Apparently, Subaru tried hard to get the CVT in the Forester.  However, they could not make it fit because the Forester is not wide enough.  Does this mean a redesign in the near future???  I have a 09 Forester and I can tell you the 4 speed automatic works really well and the critics seem to agree.  I wish Subaru would invest rather in a better audio system, improved soundproofing (cabin can be noisy) and softer plastics than a new transmission. 

[inco]

For the past 11 years we have had Subies and we are almost coming up on 12. The first two were Foresters and the current one is a Legacy because the new Forester wasn't out then. Next year we will get our fourth and it will be a Forester.

In fact there may be two of them parked here. Why? - well it's because they are so well built and problem free that it is really hard to ignore.

I like my Acadia. However it has not been problem free with at least three recalls, new front suspension, one headlight and now brakes. Last one doesn't count as a problem I know, but it is still an expense. So I'm at that stage of my life where size doesn't matter and since I'm not hauling luggage to and from the airport anymore I can downsize and it's very difficult to ignore the positives that we have had with Subaru.

Some will recall that I drove the Outback. You also noted that I really did not like the CVT in it and so I'm going to consider the Forester. I sat in it and it can work and since there is a loyalty reward to be had it makes a compelling case to change. We will see.

[cruzzer]

I think the improvements to the engine are more than welcome. Our '06 Forester is excellent in almost all respects, aside from our dealer's expensive and poor service. We find the styling of the new Forester to be unfortunately generic, but the increased room particularly in the backseat would be good. As the author has said, Subaru should be quicker on including simple advances like the auto up on power windows, not to mention 5 (or 6) speed automatic! We have the 5 speed manual and will be staying with the manual in our next Forester as well. Much better acceleration and improved fuel economy. My biggest complaint is how Subaru Canada gouges Canadians. The base Forester costs about $5,000 less in the US. I know it is going to be 'more' but 25% more??

[Zombie]

The base Forester costs about $5,000 less in the US. I know it is going to be 'more' but 25% more??

Most people in say Cali won't pay much more for AWD but here in Canada well that is a different story. I'm guessing they have to keep the price pretty close from state to state to stop people from cross state shopping.
My WRX is from the US and the 8500 saved was definitly worth the trouble of importing.