Last post on Nov 05, 2008 at 3:00 PM
You are in the Subaru Forester
What is this discussion about?
Subaru Forester, Toyota RAV4, SUV
#589 of 617 Re: forester in the mud [jerseymom8285]
Jun 18, 2007 (3:31 am)
I just went thought this. We bought A forester brand new in 2001 and just sold it. The forester was very reliable, likable, comfortable and was probably the best car buying decision we had made to date. Recently we had a baby, the subaru was pushing 100,000 miles with no trouble but the subaru has one serious flaw with kids; the backseat is not deep enough! These car seats take up a lot of room. The only way to fit a rear facing car seat in a subie is to put it in the middle of the back seat and have it intrude between the two front seats. I did a TON a research and tried out the RAV$ - we have been delighted so far. This car allows you to put the car seat directly behind a front seat with plenty of rear leg room and front room. I think the Rav4 has 38.3 inches in the back seat vs, 33.7 for the subie. In general the car is much roomier. Also, the V6 is not offered in the subie and gets only 1 mile per gallon less than the 4 cylinder. If the rear seat room issue is not a factor, than buy which ever you like better; you can't go wrong. But I suspect from your name you have kids, so I'd get the rav4.
#590 of 617 Re: forester in the mud [sidious6688]
Jun 18, 2007 (5:46 am)
"Also, the V6 is not offered in the subie and gets only 1 mile per gallon less than the 4 cylinder."
Don't need a V6 with the turbo.
#591 of 617 Re: forester in the mud [sidious6688]
Jun 18, 2007 (8:58 am)
Sidious or anyone who has an answer~for that matter,
Thanks for your input. It means alot. While I don't have any car seats in my life right now~the leg room in general is I'm gathering you purchased the limited? That is what we are thinking of as when our family is all together~our son visiting, he is 6ft tall and with the ability to move the seats back, I think there would be enough leg room.
One other question; Does having the full spare bother you in any way? I love the idea that the rear opens like a door rather than a van door as I have a very bad back, thus we are also going for the lumbar support. I have heard you can either get or it comes with a hard shell that is lockable to prevent theft or damage?
Thanks again. My family is leaning towards the RAV, now I just have to test drive them one more time and make a decision.
#592 of 617 Re: forester in the mud [jerseymom8285]
Jun 18, 2007 (9:14 am)
Wow~I just saw the other replies. Thanks to all of you who replied so far. I have not test driven them yet, but will this week. We went last Saturday to look, sit in them talk to the salespeople, etc. I was recently in an accident and just started driving this past Sunday morning.
Now we will go back to test drive after researching to see what seems to fit better for me.
I'm coming from a Windstar Mininvan which I loved, (We had purchased it for moving the kids back and forth to college and for aging parents as well)it that saved my life. So, I'm sure I will have to adjust to the smaller size with either car. But for some reson the Rav seems a bit higher? maybe my imagination?
#593 of 617 Re: forester in the mud [jerseymom8285]
Jun 18, 2007 (3:08 pm)
But for some reson the Rav seems a bit higher?
No the driving position is higher in the RAV4. So you have a slightly better view of the road (good) but then you also have a higher center of gravity (bad).
#594 of 617 Re: forester in the mud [jerseymom8285]
Jun 18, 2007 (3:31 pm)
We bought the Sport - in between the base and Limited. Wife really likes the Flint Nica color, only available on Sport. I was not a fan of the sideways as opposed to the upwards lifting rear door on the subaru, but now that I have it, I don't mind it. I also hated the idea of the rear tire hanging off the back, but again now that I have it, it does not bother me. I'm 6'1," back seat leg room fine when seat in front set for my height. Simply shocked by the rear leg room.
I believe the cover for the rear spare tire depends on the trim level you get; base, sport or limited. The sport comes with a hard case that has a elastic sort of grip om the back of the tire. Sounds lame but actually works quite well. I think the limited may have some sort of clamps, but does not actually lock to my knowledge.
#595 of 617 Re: forester in the mud [kdshapiro]
Jun 18, 2007 (3:33 pm)
The back seat of the new RAV4 is larger than the subaru BY FAR.
#596 of 617 Re: forester in the mud [kdshapiro]
Jun 18, 2007 (3:38 pm)
The turbo is a tremendous performer, no question. I was pretty stunned by the acceleration the one time I drove one. I'm not a turbo fan, don't like the delay. This is just my preference though. Also, no premium gas needed in Toyota. Don't get me wrong; I loved my 2001 Subaru forester. I was disgusted that subaru did not have a new vehicle that met my needs, I would have bought another without hesitation. I don't understand why subie makes the outback, legacy and forester all with the same size rear seat. If the rear seat size is not an issue, I would recommend a forester without hesitation. That said, now that I own the Rav4, I think its a better vehicle. This probably isn't fair though, its a newer design. when the new forester comes out, I'll probably think thats even better.
#597 of 617 Re: forester in the mud [sidious6688]
Jun 18, 2007 (6:17 pm)
The spare tire cover on the Limited is a hard shell with a clamp. The way it's designed, you can't (or would have a very hard time) release the clamp with the rear hatch door closed. No, it doesn't lock but if you can't get to the release mechanisim ... it's all the same. Nothing is thieft proof. If they want it, they're going to get it. I was recently told by a service guy at the dealer, that wheel locks only stop you from changing a flat easily .. they don't stop thieves. He's probably right.
#598 of 617 Re: forester in the mud [sidious6688]
Jun 18, 2007 (7:35 pm)
I understand. I don't have to haul around car seats and babies. While neither back seat is cavernous, the size of the Forester just suits my needs. It's small enough to be a very tight handling vehicle, given what it is in the first place. The handling of the Rav4 is just okay in my opinion, something to consider when looking at these two vehicles.