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
Wagons Subaru Crew Subaru Forester 2009 Subaru Forester
3666 messages, Last post on Dec 07, 2009 at 4:31 PM
You are in the Subaru Forester Forum. Your Host is kcram
|
Replying to: ateixeira (Dec 28, 2007 8:47 am) I agree, and a BIG one it is, too. Given that Subaru's never been know for superlative trannies, you'd think they'd jump at the chance to go with a 5 or 6 AT to make up for past lapses. Disappointing, especially from this mfr. No worry - my '03 will keep me going until the '10s come out with a better tranny and the other inevitable kinks worked out. But overall, I like the clean lines of the redesign. Interior is nice and simple; let's hope some of that extra 3" translates into more driver's legroom, with a similar carryover for the new height. And what's that pod near the front of the hood in the photos? Surely not a reincarnation of the outboard tach, a la "The Judge!" |
|
|
Replying to: gmginsfo (Dec 29, 2007 4:53 pm) The question, of course, is "For which models?" Could the 4AT for Forester/Impreza be a transitional transmission until the new CVT is phased in? Mr. Mori also mentioned that a new generation of horizontally-opposed engines would be introduced in 2010. |
|
|
Replying to: gmginsfo (Dec 29, 2007 4:53 pm)
|
|
|
Replying to: batman47 (Dec 30, 2007 9:08 am) They did bling up the Mitsu though. So if you like flashy it may be for you. -mike |
|
|
Replying to: batman47 (Dec 30, 2007 9:08 am) RAV4, CR-V, and Rogue took the top 3 spots. Forester was not included, probably because the new one wasn't out yet. They said the RAV4 had a 4EAT, is that right? I thought it was 5. Maybe they made a typo. Any how, the funny thing was the 4 bangers beat the V6s, pretty much across the board. Those are the competitors for the Forester. If you want to know what to expect, and what the targets should be for the Forester, read that article. Test averages: 0-60mph: 9.1 seconds 1/4 mile: 17.0s  82mph Top Speed: 111 dBA 70mph cruise: 70 MPG during test: 19 70-0 braking: 184 feet Skidpad: 0.74 g Lane Change: 56.7mph There are your targets, basically. I think the Forester can beat most of those, and blow away that fuel economy.
|
|
|
Replying to: ateixeira (Dec 31, 2007 3:48 pm) The 4-cylinder RAV4 comes with 4AT, whereas the V-6 version uses 5AT. |
|
|
Replying to: ateixeira (Dec 31, 2007 3:48 pm) The max payload capacity of any RAV4 is the equivalent of 7-persons weight (approximately 150 lbs each). So if you load your RAV4 with 7-persons the roof rail and the roof box are just decorations. Camping or picnic with 7-person is unpractical in a RAV4, i.e. no cargo for the usual stuff. Let’s us now see the Outlander (V6) where its payload capacity is enough to carry a total weight of 9-people (150 lbs each). This is to say 7-people as passengers and the weight equivalent of 2-people as cargo. The roof rail and roof box make sense here. This situation is much better with the Outlander ES 2.4L which its payload capacity is equivalent to 10-people weight. Making some allowances for the engine weight of both vehicles (RAV4 (V6) and Outlander (V6)) the Outlander has more than 80 lbs of meat (similar results for the 4-cyl). This weight difference in material of construction makes the Outlander stronger for carry more cargo than the RAV4, the CR-V and the Rogue. I think that the 2009 Forester will have the same limitation. Road test in the future should test the drivability of the vehicle with maximum payload capacity to find out if the vehicles still responds as expected. In my research for a 7-seat SUV I was almost ready to order a RAV4 (V6 or a 4-cyl) but after going into the details of both vehicles plus some comments of RAV4’s owners about the poor payload capacity of the Toyota I am now more inclined to order an Outlander ES 2.4L. I am not in the business of towing anything (boat, motor home, etc) so at a price of MSRP $23,100 I think the Outlander ES 2.4L may suit my requirements. However I will wait for the new Forester to make my final decision. The RAV4 and the CR-V are pavement SUV. The Rogue, Subaru and Outlander can be taken out of pavement, however the Outlander will allow you to carry not only people but plenty of cargo and that is what a proper SUV is for. |
|
|
Replying to: batman47 (Jan 01, 2008 7:11 am) How safe could kids be with their heads mere inches from the rear glass? Seriously, get a minivan if you need 7+ payload. It's the rational thing to do. The Forester always had more payload than the CR-V or RAV4. When I shopped in 1998 the Subaru offered the most, followed by the CR-V, with the 760 lb rating of the Toyota bringing up the rear. So the 4 banger RAV4 does have a 4 speed, interesting. Even more interesting is that it still won in C&D. The V6 is quite an engine (I have the same engine in my Sienna) so I'm not surprised it won the Edmunds comparo, even though apart from the powertrain I do not think it's the best in class.
|
|
|
Replying to: ateixeira (Jan 01, 2008 8:12 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: batman47 (Jan 01, 2008 9:23 am) Good luck in finding something that will suit your needs, I doubt there is something out there for you. -mike |
|
You are here:
Forums
Wagons Subaru Crew Subaru Forester 2009 Subaru Forester
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Subaru Forester
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
