Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Prices Paid: Buying & Leasing Experiences Subaru Forester Prices Paid and Buying Experience
2724 messages, Last post on Nov 05, 2009 at 2:58 PM
You are in the Prices Paid: Buying & Leasing Experiences Forum. Your Hosts are car_man & kyfdx
|
went ahead and closed the deal (which also included a VCP card which gives 6 free oil changes and a 10% discount off parts? or something--- although it does have a warranty the 6 free oil changes isn't bad) 2005 XT Premium--$24,642 (before taxes--includes $1750 rebate) Includes: Security System Auto Dimming Mirror/Compass Cargo Tray Rear Bumber Cover |
|
|
|
| We do have an alarm---the salesman was wrong. All in all great buying experience at Diablo Subaru of Walnut Creek. I was surprised at how straight they were. They only tried to sell the extended warranty and wax seal process (don't know what it's called.) Thanks to the consumer reports auto pricing service I knew what the dealer holdback was and was able to gauge how low the dealer was willing to go. The process was fairly painless and I am in loooove with my new XS LL Bean edition. | |
|
Replying to: aspesisteve (Apr 01, 2005 9:16 am) I'll definitely mark them down as a result though, on the survey. I don't like those types of tactics.  Lets just spread the word to others that its bogus and unnecessary and to come prepared with a certified cheque to avoid all that rubbish - lets hear the bogus dealer try to justify the application then! |
|
|
Replying to: ndigiorgio (Mar 31, 2005 11:16 pm) Make sure to mark them down for it in the survey and spread the word! |
|
|
I'm surprised to see that the rollover rating for the 2004 Honda Pilot is only 15%. How can this be the same as the Subaru Outback, which is a station wagon. I was considering the Outback because I was assuming it had a smaller chance to rollover than a SUV.. My other favorite was the Subaru Forester, but the rollover rating is even higher (16%). You can check these numbers at the government web page: http://www.safercar.gov/RollRatings.cfm I feel a little bit deceived, because the salesperson I visited here at the Fields Erthel dealer here in Cincinnati told me with great pride that the Outback had a lower chance to rollover than SUVs. Maybe somebody will be able to explain me these rating numbers. Thanks, Pablo
|
|
|
Replying to: pichula99 (Apr 02, 2005 10:06 pm) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ------------------- You have to take the NHTSA rollover ratings with a grain of salt. There are two components to the test: a dynamic test that actually tests a moving vehicle, but the score is only pass/fail, and a purely static measurement of the height of the center of gravity which produces those percentages. In the dynamic test, the vehicle is put through some maneuvers to see if it will tip its swheels. The test is done at specific speeds and is a pass/fail, based on whether the vehicle tips or not. It isn't done at progressively higher speeds to see if one vehicle is more likely to tip sooner than the other. In the static test, the height of the center of gravity is measured versus the width of the vehicle's track. From this, the percentage probability of rollover is computed. The Pilot benefits from having a very wide track, which does help stability and, on paper, helps reduce rollovers. I believe the Outback suffers because it has even higher ground clearance than the Pilot and is significantly narrower. The problem with the NHTSA test is that with just a pass/fail test with a moving vehicle, it doesn't factor in enough of vehicle dynamics. E.g. in the pass/fail maneuver, one vehicle could well have been precariously close to tipping but just made it, while the other vehicle was rock-solid and could have been going 20 mph faster without a tip. Nevertheless, the Pilot and its MDX brother both do very well in these tests.
|
|
|
Replying to: pichula99 (Apr 03, 2005 7:04 am) kirstie_h Roving Host Host, Future Vehicles & Smart Shopper discussions |
|
|
That info was useless the minute it was published. They evaluated a 2004 Outback and by that time the completely new 2005 models had arrived. 2005s have a wider track and more mass, both help, and more clearance, which hurts the score. So it really needs to be re-tested. Funny thing is the 2004 model was a car, so it rated poorly in that class. But when the 2005 gets rated as a truck it'll actually be among the best. It's all relative. -juice
|
|
|
Again, please take any additional comments about rollover ratings to the SUV board referenced above. Any further posts on the topic will be deleted. Thank you for your cooperation. |
|
|
Replying to: ateixeira (Apr 04, 2005 6:54 am) You're right, I checked the dimensions for 2005 and they are different, the car is wider. Sorry for my ignorance but could you tell me what do you mean with "clearance"?And also, does the track refers to the separation of the wheels? Thank you, Pichula |
|
You are here:
Forums
Prices Paid: Buying & Leasing Experiences Subaru Forester Prices Paid and Buying Experience
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Subaru Forester
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
