Ask the Car People.SM


Subaru Forester MPG-Real World Numbers

216 messages,  Last post on Nov 26, 2012 at 9:58 PM

You are in the Subaru Forester Forum.

What is this discussion about? Subaru Forester, Fuel Efficiency (MPG), Wagon

Messages Page 11 of 23

#95 of 216 2009 Subary Forester - Real World fuel mileage by phil53

Aug 06, 2008 (8:06 am)

I am considering the purchase of a 2009 Subaru Forester 2.5X Limited. Before I do, though, I'd like to get input on what type of mileage folks are getting in the real world. It would help to know what type of driving you do (% city/suburban/highway), how you drive (cautious, average, aggressive), city/combined/highway mileage and how many miles you have on the vehicle.
Since the engine and transmission (4AT) have not changed recently, I would also welcome input from owners of older models with the same drivetrain and how it has fared long-term. Overall impressions of the vehicle would be welcome as well.
A bit about me. I'm getting rid of a 2000 Beetle TDI that gets 42 mpg average. So, obviously, mileage is a big consideration. My wife wants something with 4WD or AWD for the winter. I'd like something with a great deal of utility so I can park my 2004 Avalanche whenever possible. At the same time, I'd like something with the same level of luxury I enjoy with my Avalanche (pretty loaded up). I am an aggresive driver - not in the sense that you see used by law enforcement. But I accelerate quickly, I drive 5 or 10 over the limit and I don't over-inflate my tires or use any hyper-mileage tricks. I don't baby my vehicles (but I do take care of them). My commute is a little over 30 miles, about 70%highway/30%suburban traffic in a midwest metropolitan area.
By the way, I'm comparing this against a Nissan Rogue SL AWD.

#96 of 216 Re: 2009 Subary Forester - Real World fuel mileage [phil53] by ateixeira

Aug 06, 2008 (10:15 am)

Replying to: phil53 (Aug 06, 2008 8:06 am)
A Forester Limited like ours should be pretty close to what you want. We have an 09, and I had previously owned a 98.
 
My wife drives it, mostly around town. She tends to get 24mpg or so, but that's mostly in town driving, almost no long distance trips (we take our minivan on trips).
 
We've seen mileage from 22mpg (all city) to 34mpg (an all highway jaunt). We only have 1000 or so miles on it now, so I suspect that will improve as it breaks in (my 98 did).
 
I think you can realistically expect an average of anywhere from 23-28mpg or so, depending on your driving habits and especially the type of driving.

#97 of 216 Re: 2009 Subary Forester - Real World fuel mileage [ateixeira] by phil53

Aug 06, 2008 (11:07 am)

Replying to: ateixeira (Aug 06, 2008 10:15 am)
Thanks. The averages you mention seem to track with what I've been told by a couple of people I've talked to (25 - 28). That beats what I'm hearing on the Rogue. I've also gone back and read previous posts and see anywhere from 20 to 34. So that's not bad for a small SUV. Just wish they'd improve on the 4AT. Rogue's CVT with paddle shifters beats it hands-down. The 4AT seems to hunt and shift a little rough on the one I drove.
I'd be interested to see if anyone's taken a roadtrip with one of the cargo carriers on top. I'll need to do that once or twice a year.

#98 of 216 Re: 2009 Subary Forester - Real World fuel mileage [phil53] by ateixeira

Aug 06, 2008 (12:06 pm)

Replying to: phil53 (Aug 06, 2008 11:07 am)
I did with my old one, a soft carrier on top of a 98. My guess is that cost me an MPG or two.
 
Forester may get a CVT next year and I bet they'll use the same supplier as Nissan. My buddy has an Altima and that CVT impressed me, much better than, say, the one on the 2.4l Outlander.

#99 of 216 Re: 2009 Subary Forester - Real World fuel mileage [phil53] by bbthomas

Aug 06, 2008 (3:54 pm)

Replying to: phil53 (Aug 06, 2008 8:06 am)
I commute about 32 miles one way, 15% city/85% highway. With 1500 miles on my 2.5X Limited, I average around 27.5 mpg. Depending on traffic, I've seen as high as 30 mpg. I consider my driving style average, though I do over-inflate my tires by a couple of psi. For highway commuting I find the 4AT fine, only on hilly back roads do I wish for a 5AT (when I used the manual mode).

#100 of 216 Re: 2009 Subary Forester - Real World fuel mileage [phil53] by xwesx

Aug 06, 2008 (4:29 pm)

Replying to: phil53 (Aug 06, 2008 11:07 am)
The cargo carrier is going to hit it rather hard. With just my soft carrier on my '96 Outback, I would lose a couple MPG. With a cargo carrier on my '08 Outback (the Subaru-branded Yakima Load Warrior) and loaded, I lost 6-8 MPG (was getting 28-30 without the carrier, and ran about 22 MPG with it) consistently. It was brutal considering the distance traveled with it on top (about 4000 miles on a 5500 mile trip).
 
This summer, I drove my minivan on a trip to the Kasilof river (about 500 miles from home). I had the same cargo carrier on top. I got between 17 and 22 MPG depending on whether I ran 70(+) or kept it at 60. I get that much around town (average 20.5 MPG) and managed 25.5 out of it (3.8L V6 in a '98 Caravan AWD) on a recent 400-mile round trip to Tok. At $4.50 a gallon, that was an expensive way to carry a little extra cargo.

#101 of 216 by buckhuntr

Aug 06, 2008 (6:00 pm)

I just took my family on a 3,400 mile road trip in my brand new 09X Premium, and with the Subaru OEM long cargo box (aerodynamic) we got 24mpg for the trip. The Foz had less than 500 miles when we started. When we got to Florida, the box came off and spent the week in the condo, then was reinstalled in about 5 minutes for the return drive.

#102 of 216 Good input by phil53

Aug 06, 2008 (7:14 pm)

Thanks for the input on the cargo carriers. Sounds like the OEM solid box is the way to go. Of course, I'd rather not carry any. But I take one or two trips a year when my Avalanche is pretty loaded. The Forester can't come close to carrying that much without either a car-top carrier or a small trailer.
buckhuntr - 24 doesn't sound that bad, but you don't say how fast you were going. Out here in the midwest, 75 on the interstate and 65 - 70 on the 2 lanes is pretty common.
xwesx - 17 is pretty discouraging, so I'm hoping buckhuntr is closer to what I might expect. I can haul everything I might want with the Avalanche and still get 17 mpg.
ateixeira - thanks for the info on the CVT. Just not sure I want to wait until next year.
Also - thanks to bbthomas for the input.

#103 of 216 Re: Good input [phil53] by p0926

Aug 07, 2008 (11:46 am)

Replying to: phil53 (Aug 06, 2008 7:14 pm)
24 doesn't sound that bad, but you don't say how fast you were going. Out here in the midwest, 75 on the interstate and 65 - 70 on the 2 lanes is pretty common.
 
On my 04, the mileage really drops when you get up around 75 to 80. I'm pretty sure the combination of the boxy shape along with the short gearing (higher revs) is the culprit. When I moved across the country, I was amazed that my wife's Grand Cherokee actually got slightly better mpg than my Forester But then it had a bigger engine (6-cyl), RWD and was turning about a 1,000 rpms slower.
 
-Frank

#104 of 216 Re: Good input [phil53] by buckhuntr

Aug 07, 2008 (4:22 pm)

Replying to: phil53 (Aug 06, 2008 7:14 pm)
Quite a bit of the drive was at 65-75, and at 80 or higher going around Atlanta (gotta go that fast to keep from getting run over on I-285 and I-75). Then again, a lot was also at stop and go city speeds around the Tampa Bay area. Neither of which equate to top mileage. On the current tank, I'm getting 20.4 through 200 miles of Tulsa driving, which is better than the car the Foz replaced, and much better than the F150 Supercrew in the driveway. I can live with it.

Messages Page 11 of 23

To POST a message, please Sign In.

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement