It’s tough to explain, but somehow, the new Forester has a more planted appearance when it’s on the road. That might have to do with the additional width.
Unfortunately, it's not the width, so much as the lowered front bumper - hurts the approach angle, too...I'm a little concerned, since wifey tends to power out of steep driveways without a second thought.
I averaged 10.6 L/100 km (22 mpg) during my week with it. That was mostly slow city commuting, and when I had the space, I drove it hard. More about that later as well. The tank holds 60 L. By the way, you can run the XT harm-free on regular fuel with the loss of only a few horsepower.
10.6L/100km is a heck of a lot better than the 11.4L/100km I get while pu$$yfooting it on premium juice. When I leave the Fozzie with the missus for a week, I've seen it as high as 19.2L/100km. Yikes. The 60L tank is 5L less than our 2011, but the 'theoretical' range is increased by the better efficiency. Weight reduction and better interior packaging, I guess.
Still, "loss of only a few hp" is a bit of an understatement - you'd drop to about 230hp, assuming there's no ethanol in the regular stuff...oh wait, in Ontario, pretty much every station has it in 87 octane. Just pony up the extra few bucks per tank and enjoy your engine properly. The FA20 has a relatively high compression ratio for a turbocharged engine (10.6:1).
Overhead are probably the tallest, and possibly the narrowest, sun visors I’ve ever seen
...
Bracketing the rear-view mirror are two bulging camera pods.
...and there's your answer as to why that is.
OK, well let’s get back to that CVT, shall we?
I still want the S/I drive to be on a rotary dial, or at least for it NOT to default back to "I" every time I turn the car back on. I'm ok with the CVT if I never have to use "I". Fuel economy is still better in S or S# than in the 4EAT in my 2011 Forester, yet I'd get more responsive driving. In the WRX you can do it (despite it being a knob instead of buttons)...it's a simple fix to reprogram the darn buttons, Subaru!
Well, WAF (Wife Acceptance Factor) was, sadly, not as high as I’d hoped.
Mine, too - she didn't love the CVT in "I" mode...she felt that having it as a default kind of ruined the point in buying a turbo - why spend more for increased power, only to have it dulled by default?! We view power as a safety feature - if you see some a$$hole coming up behind you fast, floor it. I would have avoided being rear-ended if I weren't driving a 120hp (when new, at least) '97 Cavalier. With "I" mode, you have to push 80% or more of throttle tip-in before it'll depart "I" and give you what the engine has in store. The quest for fuel economy is great, but default to "S" or be able to select whatever you want as your default. Having to push a button every time I start the car would actually be really, really annoying.
Otherwise on the WAF, she felt that the bigger cabin took away from the cockpit-style feeling. Otherwise, she really likes the new Forester...but she'd rather buy out our 2011. I vehemently, from an economic stand-point, refuse to do that though. Looks like we'll have a 2014 or 2015 (if released in time) on March 14, 2014!
Tom, would you suggest getting the EyeSight/Navi package? It's $2,400, and honestly, the navi system doesn't seem all that well-reviewed. I'd rather spend $2,200 on the turbo than $2,400 on nav...EyeSight sounds good, but I'm concerned about how it'll be in the winter, with all that grime (aka salt) we Canucks face.
______________________
Northernridge, the Outback is longer, so you'll be comfortable in it...but the Outback is set to be redesigned (and quite nicely, I hear) soon. If you're not in a rush, then wait and see.
