Topic: First Drive: 2014 Subaru Forester

[johngenx]

Subaru has rarely offered subvented financing or cash discounts on new or current models.  Of course, they've been on a roll lately, so why discount a product you know will sell?

I'd be interested to know what's happened in terms of Subaru production costs.  Toyota was supposed to be assisting them in bringing their per unit costs down, but I'm not sure if there's been time for that to happen.

[carcrazed]

From  the Subaru Canada website it appears that there is no discount for cash or zero (or near zero) financing. Given our special $5,000+ "only in Canada pricing premium" it seems like a US puchase is still at least worth considering. 

I was told at the Winnipeg Subaru store that the 14 Forester would likely be available with 4.5% purchase financing when it arrives in a few weeks.

SOC site is showing 4.9 with no discount for cash when you build a XT Ltd.  By comparison a new Santa Fe 2.0T SE with a similar 35K sticker is 0% or $2,000 discount for cash. When you look at a 60 month finance term the Santa Fe runs about $6,000 less in terms of total payments. Of course, with the Sub's traditionally high resale  you may get a good portion of that back. 

As much as Hyundai Santa Fe is a good CUV, Hyundai knows all too well that it won't sell unless financing incentives are offered.   They even have different rates for different trim levels.

[greengs]

The extra fee on Subaru site is the dealer admin fee plus tire and air tax.  Basically they are showing you all the fees.  My dealer includes tire warranty with their admin fee.  Much like Toyota Subaru now shows you the entire price unlike most other companies where once you go in all the fees get tacked on at the end.

I found Subaru always more than fair to deal with.  I'm ok with their admin fee because they give me a tire warranty with it and don't charge for lock nuts and block heater like others do.  Or at least it's maybe built into their price?? No matter how you look at it though they have to make a certain amount of money on their deals.  So if you get the fee "waived" you're leaving that much discount on the table somewhere else.  Otherwise they woudln't be in business long. 

[conwelpic]

Canadian video review on the new Forester

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6Y4Y6e0WlY&list=UUX13wwdzipRhH001W3X0WyQ&index=1

[dirtyjeffer]

Canadian video review on the new Forester

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6Y4Y6e0WlY&list=UUX13wwdzipRhH001W3X0WyQ&index=1

yea, i'd have to say, if i were in the market for a CUV, this would be my likely choice...i like the new Sante Fe as well, and as has been mentioned, the payments would make the Sante Fe tough to beat...it would likely be between a Forester and a Santa Fe though...i think my mind would lean towards the Forester, but my wallet might force my hand to the Santa Fe...oh well, both are great anyway.

[safristi]

  quit thinking with yer wallet  man,that's in yer rear end.....think with yer DICK....if I only had half a BRIAN! ..ZACK says it 's good but where is Lacey...pumping IRON again............... .....(photo denied by WING and the master of the Universe )

[blotter]

We were leaning towards the Mazda CX-5 (6MT/FWD) to replace the '06 Forester (5MT) in the driveway but the new 2014 Forester is improved in many key areas and is now a serious candidate. The pricing however is a big issue. While the pricing of ALL the Subaru products in Canada is too high when compared to the US the Forester is particularly over priced (base model $21,999US vs. $25,999). Then add in delivery (according to the Subaru US website it's included in the US price vs. $1595 in Canada. So in total, US$21,999 vs C$27,594. I don't expect the pricing here to be the same as it is in the US, but to me this is excessive.

comparing a FWD to Subaru's AWD is apples and oranges.
If you want to be fair...... (i know you want manual but...)

the Mazda CX5 GS - AWD - auto trans. cost $36,923.05
(no roof rails or power tailgate)

the Subaru Forester Limited Edition - auto trans. cost $39,801.99

that's $2,878.94
both have some minor features the other excludes.
but i think you could easily negotiate the price of the Forester down to match the Mazda.

[johngenx]

but i think you could easily negotiate the price of the Forester down to match the Mazda.

I have serious doubts that a dealer would come down $3K on a Forester.

[Brig]

I have serious doubts that a dealer would come down $3K on a Forester.

Yeah, that gave me quite the chuckle, too. 

[inco]

   Been there and know differently.

[sailor723]

Thought the same thing myself. If that guy can get 3K off of a Forester i want him negotiating my next car purchase. 

[SaskSpecV]

I have serious doubts that a dealer would come down $3K on a Forester.

Yeah, that gave me quite the chuckle, too. 

Consider yourself lucky if the dealer doesn't ADD $3K to the price of a Forester...

Looked at the 2014 Forester and 2013 Outback pricing (2.5L 6MT Touring trims for both) - with $1500 cash discount for the Outback it was actually $400 less than the Forester.  Missing a couple of convenience items compared to the Forester (power liftgate comes to mind), but other than that nearly identically equipped.  And dimensions and specs are very close too (Outback a little longer but shorter in height, similar cargo and passenger room, can't compare weight because not listed for the Forester - but probably close there too).  Outback can tow a lot more (2700 versus 1500 lbs - odd considering they have exactly the same drivetrain).  With the (presumably) better quality interior on the new Forester, they should be comparable there as well.  Anyone driven both - are there other differences that I'm missing?

[sailor723]

I have serious doubts that a dealer would come down $3K on a Forester.

Yeah, that gave me quite the chuckle, too. 

Consider yourself lucky if the dealer doesn't ADD $3K to the price of a Forester...

Looked at the 2014 Forester and 2013 Outback pricing (2.5L 6MT Touring trims for both) - with $1500 cash discount for the Outback it was actually $400 less than the Forester.  Missing a couple of convenience items compared to the Forester (power liftgate comes to mind), but other than that nearly identically equipped.  And dimensions and specs are very close too (Outback a little longer but shorter in height, similar cargo and passenger room, can't compare weight because not listed for the Forester - but probably close there too).  Outback can tow a lot more (2700 versus 1500 lbs - odd considering they have exactly the same drivetrain).  With the (presumably) better quality interior on the new Forester, they should be comparable there as well.  Anyone driven both - are there other differences that I'm missing?

I'm surprised to hear that about the size. I thought the OB was bigger. I wonder if they might ditch the 3.6 in the OB in favour of a  turbo four?

[SaskSpecV]

I'm surprised to hear that about the size. I thought the OB was bigger. I wonder if they might ditch the 3.6 in the OB in favour of a  turbo four?

The Outback is a fair bit longer - about 8 inches IIRC (189 versus ~ 181).  Only one inch wider than the Forester, and 2.5 inches shorter.  Same ground clearance for both (220 mm).  But I agree it "looks" bigger, though maybe the size of the new Forester has narrowed the gap.

[sailor723]

I'm surprised to hear that about the size. I thought the OB was bigger. I wonder if they might ditch the 3.6 in the OB in favour of a  turbo four?

The Outback is a fair bit longer - about 8 inches IIRC (189 versus ~ 181).  Only one inch wider than the Forester, and 2.5 inches shorter.  Same ground clearance for both (220 mm).  But I agree it "looks" bigger, though maybe the size of the new Forester has narrowed the gap.

A wider and longer cargo area is usually more usable in the real world than a shorter, narrower (but higher) one. Even if both have about the same cubic capacity.

[inco]

In 2011 Subaru rolled out the new four cylinder engine that was slightly improved over the old one and planted it in our Forester. I call it the 'Toya motor' because it too now requires the use of synthetic motor oil to run. Oil change now runs about $100. 

I'm assuming the new Forester is using the same engine, but I do not know if they extended it across the line and that the Outback now has it. I would think so, but it would be worth asking about. All things being equal I prefer the look and size of the new Forester. The OB looks too bloated for my tastes.

[johngenx]

I'm not a huge fan of the current OBW in terms of exterior appearance, but it drives great. The 3.6 OBW is my favourite Scoob. The six and VTD AWD with rear LSD is wicked. Sucks gas though...

[SaskSpecV]

I'm not a huge fan of the current OBW in terms of exterior appearance, but it drives great. The 3.6 OBW is my favourite Scoob. The six and VTD AWD with rear LSD is wicked. Sucks gas though...

Cue Arthur, "the poster formerly known as SirO", to regale us with stories of the swirling vortex that was the 3.6L OBW gas tank...

And I agree with your assessment of the OBW's looks John.  Something just doesn't look quite right, especially the front grill.  Can't put my finger on it though...  I actually don't quite like the 2014 Forester exterior as much as the 2011 - 2013 - but I think that's only because I like the 17" rims on the older model a little more.

[sailor723]

I'm not a huge fan of the current OBW in terms of exterior appearance, but it drives great. The 3.6 OBW is my favourite Scoob. The six and VTD AWD with rear LSD is wicked. Sucks gas though...

Cue Arthur, "the poster formerly known as SirO", to regale us with stories of the swirling vortex that was the 3.6L OBW gas tank...

And I agree with your assessment of the OBW's looks John.  Something just doesn't look quite right, especially the front grill.  Can't put my finger on it though...  I actually don't quite like the 2014 Forester exterior as much as the 2011 - 2013 - but I think that's only because I like the 17" rims on the older model a little more.

No doubt in my mind that the previous generation of OBW was a much better looking vehicle...a bit too small mind you, but better looking.

One thing that really bothers me about the present generation is the corrugated look of the plastic cladding on the rocker panels.

[johngenx]

If they had a Legacy Wagon GT with the 3.6L, that would be pretty nice.  Still would drain the gas tank too quickly, but would be a pretty awesome driving machine.  I'd wondered if they were going to make space for the six in the new Forester, but it's turbo or aspro.  The 2.0L turbo should use less gas than the 3.6L, but we'll see how it works out.  Subaru's turbo engines aren't misers either, though this unit is new.  The CVT will play a role too.