Ask the Car People.SM


Subaru XT Turbo Forester - READ ONLY

6715 messages,  Last post on Nov 02, 2006 at 7:48 AM

You are in the Subaru Forester Forum.

What is this discussion about? Subaru XT, Subaru Forester, SUV



Messages Page 61 of 672

#595 of 6715 XT vs XS Handling by iluvsubaru2

Aug 04, 2003 (12:56 am)

Ken,
Neither XS or XT was premium hence no moonroof to bias my test drives. I like moonroofs but at 6'4", they don't like me (reason I don't own an OB VDC, which is wonderful on ice and snow, is my head was just a millimeter away from the moonroof & kissing the OB's A-pillar).
 
You're probably right: small shifts in center of gravity may cause significant changes in handling. Perhap that happened with the XT. If so I'd expect Subaru could do a fix through their SOA dealers if it's a simple and "clean" fix (ie cure won't cause a problem elsewhere).
 
About my dealer. He opened his franchise in 1999 and I was one of his first customers. He's great.
And he has a very fine service department. I find his sales staff very accomodating. I do my routine service there, even oil changes. I do this for two reasons: first I'm mechanically inept; second, it provides a good way develop & cement relationships with sales and service. It's a quid pro quo.
 
I have driven every Forester & Outback model since 2000, usually while getting an oil change. Dealer knows I will buy when I find enough small changes (eg 2004 XS) or one big improvement (eg VDC OB or Forester XT), over my 2000S.
 
He also knows I'm careful. I'm mechanically inept but I'm a good driver and I am meticulous when it comes to vehicle care, or at least I try to be.
 
Jake

#596 of 6715 motor trend road test of Baja and Forester Turbo by pinng

Aug 04, 2003 (1:40 am)

I'm not sure if anybody has posted this link before but here it goes:
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/suv/112_0308_frst_subs/
 
Not much details but I guess that's what it is: First Drive.
 
Pin

#597 of 6715 2200 Mile XT Report by lbhaley

Aug 04, 2003 (7:23 am)

I now have 2200 miles on my XT MT and I am extremely satisfied with all aspects of this car. I really like the manual transmission. It is smooth and precise and a blast to shift. I have had no problem with the first to second shift once I learned to get the revs up to around 4000 in first before shifting. The engine revs so easily and smoothly that that this doesn't feel the least bit excessive. I guess I am lucky in that my wife also prefers manual transmissions and wouldn't own an automatic. She currently has an 00 V6 Passat manual which she loves. I drove the XT to Vermont this weekend. It is about 135 miles of highway and 15 miles of mountain roads. I set the cruise control on 78 on the highway. I blasted out of a couple of toll booths. and generally had fun. The turbo really shines in the mountains. The road I take goes over a small mountain and becomes very steep as you approach the top. My 98 Forester required third gear just to maintain 45 mph up the steep part. The V6 Passat will maintain 45 in fourth but not accelerate. The XT would smoothly accelerate in fourth any time I wished. It probably would have maintained 45 in fifth but I didn't want to lug it. There was a new V8 pickup truck on my tail when I started up the mountain. By the time I reached the top he was no where to be seem. I also had an opportunity to pass a dump truck in a very short passing zone. I dropped back to third and was by him with room to spare. Even though 5.3 sec 0-60 blasts are fun, the real advantage of the turbo is providing effortless power when you need it. My mileage for the trip was 23.7. This is the first time I have broken 23 mpg. As far as handling is concerned the XT handles better than my 98 Forester S and that is good enough for me. I am very, very satisfied with this car.

#598 of 6715 by kens

Aug 04, 2003 (8:45 am)

Jake:
 
My apologies for asking you the same question twice. I'm losing it! ;-D
 
Ken

#599 of 6715 Another owner's view... by ballistic

Aug 04, 2003 (9:21 am)

ibhaley reports, "I have had no problem with the first to second shift once I learned to get the revs up to around 4000 in first before shifting."
 
Mine is opposite: The higher I rev in 1st, the more difficult to rev-match and make a smooth, lurch-free upshift into 2nd without undue concentration. Therefore, when I do use 1st, I tend to upshift at 2,000-2,500, even if I use higher revs on subsequent upshifts. Additionally, while I like the XT's engine note under wide-open throttle, I don't especially like the sound produced under moderate throttle at 3,500 or 4,000 or more in 1st gear. It's unpleasant to my ear, and I avoid it.
 
The best all-around solution for me is to skip 1st gear altogether whenever possible.
 
..."My mileage for the trip was 23.7."
 
Mine has not yet reached 23mpg on a tankful, driven much less exhuberantly than yours. For example, I've never yet maintained over 70mph for more than a few moments - mainly because I prefer to observe strict break-in routines until 2K miles, and I still have 800 to go.
 
..."I am very, very satisfied with this car."
 
I'm at about 70% satisfaction, which is considerably lower than I expected. My many likes: The interior accomodations (both front and rear, now that I've found a position for my seat that still provides acceptable backseat space) are fine for the size of the car. Outward visibility through the tall windows is outstanding (although the sun visors are positioned well below the windshield header, making it difficult to see overhead traffic lights). Ride, handling and braking are meeting my expectations, but might call for stiffer sway bars eventually. The car is delightfully nimble and maneuverable, with a nice tight turning circle. Throttle response is, of course, outstanding at any engine speed above about 1,200-1,500 rpms, although I think pulling power right off idle might be slightly less than in an X/XS. Still, it's adequate. Hill-climbing power is truly exceptional, as is passing. Body structural stiffness is great, and I love the solid, sounds-like-Mercedes-quality 'thunk' when the doors - all of them - close (except when a window is partway down; then it sounds awful). And yes, I'm getting used to the excessive steering boost (although getting out of the Forester and into anything else makes the other vehicle feel like a truck). The sound system seems quite good. The rear seatbacks are quick and easy to fold, compared to a lot of competitors. The headlights produce a better beam pattern than many U.S. DOT units, and I'm very glad about that because my night vision isn't what it used to be.
 
Dislikes: The hill-holder, and the clutch slip needed to get rolling after it's set. The instruments are unusually dark and difficult to read (nearly invisible)in daylight while wearing sunglasses. I'm dying to get back to my dealer to eliminate a bad buzzy rattle somewhere in the passenger airbag area, and mine also has faint buzzes from both front doors on certain surfaces; I hope the dealer can track down and eliminate these. I'm still not too wild about the multiple textures and the contrast between greys and blacks throughout the interior, and I would MUCH have preferred leather. The small gas tank, together with the mediocre MPG, requires fill-ups much more often than I'd prefer. And, oddly enough, the oil dipstick is about the hardest to read I've ever seen. No matter how many times I wipe and reinsert it, I never see a clear line indicating the oil level. Anybody else noticing this?
 
But by far my major complaint, and the ongoing reason for my only-70% satisfaction level, continues to be the unacceptable, lopsided, and completely unnecessary bias toward blinding, all-out acceleration (to the clear detriment of other important qualities, like relaxed and quiet highway cruising, fuel consumption, and probably long-term engine life) resulting from Subaru's unexpected and inappropriate choice of a drag-strip 4.44 final drive. In such a lightweight, powerful, multipurpose vehicle that could have been highly satisfactory to a very wide range of buyers, this was foolish, shortsighted, and utterly unnecessary. The XT would still have had brilliant, newsworthy, class-leading acceleration even with a 3.9! No one will ever convince me that the 4.44 was the best choice for all-around, everyday balanced performance.
 
jack

#600 of 6715 Dip Stick by leo2633

Aug 04, 2003 (11:14 am)

Jack,
 
I agree that the dipstick is difficult to read. I have found that pulling the stick, then waiting a few minutes before reinserting it will give you a clear and accurate reading. I do this with my wife's Outback and my Forester. I pull the dipsticks and wipe them off, go check the oil level on the kids cars, then go back and check the Subes. Inconvenient? Yes, but it gives good results. I look at it as just another Subaru quirk.
 
Len

#601 of 6715 ibhaley's XT report by tinytoo

Aug 04, 2003 (11:48 am)

I just want to thank you for the positive report on your XT MT. After much consideration, and reading of these discussions and reviews, I purchased a red XT MT. Over the last three weeks or so I actually started to feel dread at it's arrival after reading the incessant complaints posted about the MT's shifting difficulties (which I did not experience during my test drives). My car will be delivered in about a week and I am looking forward, once again, to it arrival!

#602 of 6715 by ballistic

Aug 04, 2003 (12:10 pm)

"Incessant complaints" about shifting difficulties? That seems like a rather extreme characterization. I've seen no complaints at all about any upshifts or downshifts other than 1st-to-2nd, and comments about that one have been mixed; some have reported being fine with it, some are not.
 
I'm sure you'll love your XT. Most owners do. I like mine, although on several counts it's a good bit farther from perfection than I thought it would be.
 
jb

#603 of 6715 XT vs XS Handling by iluvsubaru2

Aug 04, 2003 (12:12 pm)

Ken,
Neither XS or XT was premium hence no moonroof to bias my test drives. I like moonroofs but at 6'4", they don't like me (reason I don't own an OB VDC, which is wonderful on ice and snow, is my head was just a millimeter away from the moonroof & kissing the OB's A-pillar).
 
You're probably right: small shifts in center of gravity may cause significant changes in handling. Perhap that happened with the XT. If so I'd expect Subaru could do a fix through their SOA dealers if it's a simple and "clean" fix (ie cure won't cause a problem elsewhere).
 
About my dealer. He opened his franchise in 1999 and I was one of his first customers. He's great.
And he has a very fine service department. I find his sales staff very accomodating. I do my routine service there, even oil changes. I do this for two reasons: first I'm mechanically inept; second, it provides a good way develop & cement relationships with sales and service. It's a quid pro quo.
 
I have driven every Forester & Outback model since 2000, usually while getting an oil change. Dealer knows I will buy when I find enough small changes (eg 2004 XS) or one big improvement (eg VDC OB or Forester XT), over my 2000S.
 
He also knows I'm careful. I'm mechanically inept but I'm a good driver and I am meticulous when it comes to vehicle care, or at least I try to be.
 
Jake

#604 of 6715 XT vs XS Handling: How much does it matter? by iluvsubaru2

Aug 04, 2003 (12:16 pm)

Jack,
Your post prompted me to consider carefully the value of a vehicle's dry pavement handling (in summer) to it's handling in winter, on snow, slush, pack ice and glaze (assuming no changes in vehicle such as snow tires, studs, chains or traction/yaw control such as VDC delivers).
 
Couple of points: first, though I slolomed an XT and XS, it was at slow speeds due to requirements of safety. I'd like to see a more rigorous test of XT and XS, one with progressive increases at higher speeds around a slolom course as well as a timed test around a serpentine track.
 
Consumer Reports does that (& progressive speed obstacle avoidance: double lane change manuever) Unfortunately they don't test every vehicle every year, and to my knowledge they don't do winter driving tests per se (is there a CR in Canada?).
 
I mention CR not because the are perfect (they are not) or unbiased (who is?) but only because they do control for the obvious financial bias that may occur when the "testee" hires the "testor", either by advertising contracts, grants or directly.
 
WRT to winter handling, you are correct I believe in saying vehicle roll on dry pavement is probably not a big deal on ice (all else held constant). My concern is that all else isn't held constant.
 
My actual winter driving experience suggests (but does not prove) that how a vehicle handles on dry pavement in summer is predictive of how it handles in winter (assuming no changes in tires, traction/stability control gear). It goes without saying I am including a number of factors beside body roll in "handling".
 
If it were only body roll, I think your point is made. To repeat, my test drives of XS/XT raised a handling issue (for me). It would be nice if that issue proves minor wrt to winter driving.
 
You said in your post "now I'm confused" but maybe it's me who is confused. If handling differences between XT and XS are largely irrelevant to winter driving or collision avoidance in general, then I would go with the XT (higher price and operations costs are worth the added power and acceleration). I need to think more about this.
 
Thanks for your post-Jake

Messages Page 61 of 672

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement