Last post on Nov 26, 2012 at 8:58 PM
You are in the Subaru Forester
What is this discussion about?
Subaru Forester, Fuel Efficiency (MPG), Wagon
#177 of 216 Re: First tank [mjgrace]
Jan 03, 2010 (1:10 pm)
That's sweet, because usually they improve as they break in.
#178 of 216 Re: First tank [mjgrace]
Jan 05, 2010 (5:48 am)
I am up to 26,000 miles now on 2009 2.5 ltd. MPG is dropping a bit as it always does up here in New England with colder weather. Mix is probably 3/4 highway and the balance "running around" MPG pretty consistent since day one per trip computer averaging around 26.1. Actual mpg based on miles driven and gas consumption perhaps 25.5. Pretty much what I expected. Highway mileage will certainly decrease somewhat if you go over 65 mph.
#179 of 216 Re: First tank [occking]
Jan 05, 2010 (8:14 am)
It's cold (brrrrr) here in the Mid-Atlantic so I'm sure it's bone-chilling up there. Mileage on my van has dropped, too. It's also taking longer for it to warm up.
My wife's Forester has heated seats, so I'm jealous!
#180 of 216 Re: First tank [mjgrace]
Jan 05, 2010 (10:11 am)
It is ironic that I never posted under this thread with my fuel economy experience with the 2010 Forester X Premium MT I purchased in September. I posted in other threads, but not here.
I averaged about 28.5 driving it home from Seattle to Fairbanks, Alaska (about 2200 miles) going 65-70 most of the way, but once I arrived here (to winter) and settled into daily routines, the economy dropped pretty dramatically. Now, during the winter, my monthly averages are about 20 mpg, with some tanks well south of that (lowest so far is 17.5) with mixed driving, but many short trips (~ 5 miles).
This car LOVES to go 40-50 mph. Driving those speeds for 20 miles through the Whitehorse area on the drive home back in September netted me nearly 40 mpg, and a ten-mile drive through the Wasilla area a couple weeks ago increased my readout from 22mpg to a little over 30 (it had about 30 miles on it when I started the 40-50 mph stretch, which had a few stop signs/lights). Sadly, life is not long enough to go those speeds over the long haul.
Total average now after ~7000 miles is 24.5 mpg, though I am more interested in the yearly average as the current (just a little over three months) is highly skewed by winter driving.
#181 of 216 Re: First tank [xwesx]
Jan 05, 2010 (10:21 am)
netted me nearly 40 mpg
Remind me, auto or manual? Best I've done is about 33mpg with our PZEV auto.
#182 of 216 Re: First tank [ateixeira]
Jan 05, 2010 (10:31 am)
That was manual PZEV, but again, it was only 20 miles (and the 39.7 readout was on the display). Had I gone a whole tank at those speeds, who knows? As it was, I ran the remaining 70 miles (pure highway) before I filled up in Haines Junction at close to 70 mph. At fill up, I calculated either 30.4 or 30.8 - I can't remember which.
#183 of 216 Re: First tank [ateixeira]
Jan 05, 2010 (5:20 pm)
My wife's '09 F-XT averages 10-13 L/100km, depending whether it's on the highway, or in the city, over the first 23,000 km of the vehicle. In Imperial (US) terms, that's 18-23 MPG, over the first 14,000 miles. That's just barely a touch better than I got in my '04 Toyota 4-Runner (V8).
Naturally, it's a little better in the summer when it's not warming up for 5-10 mins, because it's -30 C outside, and we're not wallowing through snow drifts.
For comparison, my '09 STI has averaged 10-13 L/100km, (exactly the same).
I don't really care whether either car gets good gas mileage. We bought the cars for their performance, and AWD capabilities.
#184 of 216 Re: First tank [robm2]
Jan 08, 2010 (11:12 am)
Seriously, with a sweet fleet like that, you're not allowed to complain about anything.
#185 of 216 MPG on '09 Forester--I'm fit to be tied
Jan 23, 2010 (8:27 am)
I have an '09 automatic X LTD with fewer than 11,000 miles on it. The deciding factor that made me buy a Forester over a RAV 4 was the safety features--I had just been in a really gnarly accident and was a bit freaked out. I drive VERY conservatively in town and non-aggressively but a little fast on the highway--70 to 75 mph. Even at that, I try to drive behind semis so that I can use their wind blockage. I drive about 3/4 of the time in-town. I have been incredibly disappointed in the mileage that this car is getting, as I'm very concerned about my comsumption of fossil fuel. Over the life of my car, I've been averaging about 20 mpg and lately have only been getting 17-18 mpg. I thought that certainly the mpg indicator was to blame, so yesterday I took it to the dealer (by the way, I have serviced my car only at Hunter Subaru in Hendersonville, North Carolina). This is what the dealer told me yesterday:
--The mpg indicator is not meant to be exact (ummm...why not? Is Subaru incapable of manufacturing more precise technology?)
--But, that said, I probably AM getting 17-18 miles per gallon and this is fine because the lowest acceptable mpg for this model Forester is 15-16 mpg. They suspect that I am getting this low mileage because:
1) That is just what my car gets;
2) We live in the NC mountains and you get lower gas mileage in mountains (aren't there mountains all over the US? Furthermore, aren't our mountains far more rolling than any of the mountains out west?);
3) I should try buying premim gas;
4) The cross bars on the roof (no bike racks or kayak gear on the bars) are causing wind resistance and so I can't expect to be getting premium mileage;
5) They recently had a woman in complaining of the same problem with her Chevy, but when the guy from the dealer drove it around for 50 miles, he got much better mileage than she does and now, "She's happy as a clam." I believe that I was supposed to take a lesson from her example and be happy with what I had and understand that my low mpg must be my own fault.
Anyway, no satisfaction at all.
I would like to make two side notes:
1) I was so angry when I left Hunter Subaru that I drove straight to Jim Barkley Toyota, which is where I got my last vehicle (I love this dealership), handed the guy my keys and asked him what he could offer me for a trade-in. He said about $18,000. Appletree Honda said the same thing. So, after owning my Subaru for little over a year and having driven it only <11,000 miles, it had depreciated over $8,000. 2) My previous vehicle was a Toyota 4WD Tacoma TRD with a V-6 engine, big tires, the Off-Road package, and a lot of giddyup. It got about 20-22 miles per gallon (As I said, I drive conservatively). This figure includes all the gravel/composting/stone hauling I did. When I totaled the truck, I received $14,000 for it. This was for a truck that was over 6 years old and had over 100,000 miles on it. So. Could somebody please give me some feedback and advice? Am I being unreasonable? What should I do? Thank you so much. I'm so upset that I'm crying as I write this. Elizabeth
#186 of 216 Re: MPG on '09 Forester--I'm fit to be tied [elizabethanne]
Jan 23, 2010 (10:48 am)
Are you relying strictly on the MPG computer or are you calculating MPG manually (miles driven / gallons to fill tank)?
Having said that, the Forester is not super fuel efficient. It's very boxy and has poor aerodynamics. The 4-speed automatic is also archaic and needs at least one other gear. Subarus with the new CVT transmission get much better mileage. AFAIK, both Edmunds and Consumer Reports got about 21 MPG overall for their long term test Foresters.
I have an older Forester, and it has averaged about 20-21 over 7 years and 62,000 miles, but it's a turbo and manual transmission, so not exactly apples to apples comparison.
As far as resale value, any car depreciates the most during the first and second years. Also, I'm sure you can get better than $18K if you sold it privately instead of trading in.
The Rav-4 V6 is currently the best rated small SUV in some comparison tests, while the Forester is lagging far behind.