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
3661 messages, Last post on Nov 30, 2009 at 8:56 AM
You are in the Subaru Forester Forum. Your Host is kcram
|
Replying to: noey8 (Jun 21, 2009 5:44 am) On the one dirt fire-trail I drove (~2k feet rise in ~5 miles), I did a lot of shifting back and forth between first and second and it did cross my mind that an auto would probably be a lot easier for such things. I'm a novice to that sort of driving. |
|
|
Replying to: ateixeira (Jun 22, 2009 11:51 am) When I bought my '01, my financial situation was much different and I went almost bare bones with the L model. If I remember correctly, the only options on the car were Auto Trans. and tweeter kit. I also liked what I considered the more rugged look of the black bumpers and side cladding over the painted versions on the S model. The interior in the L model at that time was that herringbone patterned cloth in grey. The 2001 interior has actually held up great (cloth and carpets). I really liked the Blue Ridge Pearl exterior and Grey interior combo. If I do take the plunge, this time around I fully expect to go with the X Limited with either the Rugged Package or Utility Package. Like my current Forester, I plan to have the next one for a long time. So, I'm going to get it just the way I want it. I'm on the fence regarding buying a new one right now. My current Forester is still running great with almost 88,000 miles (coming up on that expensive 90,000 mile scheduled maintenance). I'm sure I could easily drive this car reliably for another five years or so. I also need to update my circa 1962 kitchen so that may take priority right now. With that said, the new design is very exciting and has really got the juices flowing. Thanks to those of you who commented regarding the interior and the rack system. I have a feeling my current Yakima system may be compatible with the rails on the new Forester.
|
|
|
Replying to: sd70 (Jun 22, 2009 1:42 pm) I miss the unpainted bumpers a bit, but I think those vanished in 2006, and I understand why. Even though they're teflon tough, they're not the most attractive. Try this - do your kitchen first, in fact your new car may get some wear and tear carrying all the stuff. When it's done, reward yourself with the new Forester.
|
|
|
Replying to: ateixeira (Jun 23, 2009 12:25 pm)
|
|
|
Replying to: sd70 (Jun 23, 2009 6:54 pm)  The guy who bought my 1998 drives it near where I work. I saw it on the street one time and it was filthy, I nearly cried.  When I had it that thing was in great shape, the wheels were even waxed. At 9 years of age it looked like maybe a 2 year old car.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm noticing the '09 XT has one odd quirk. It loves to slam its rear wheels back down after going over bumps. Examples are speed bumps; the front goes over fine but the back likes to "kick its heels" (jumps up and slams its suspension bottom limit). I suspect there isn't enough rebound damping. My brother's Lexus 400h goes over the same speed bumps without any kickback. Any suggestions for shocks that provide a little more rebound damping? I may change them over when the main vehicle warranty expires in another year and a half. I don't plan to change the springs as there's no interest in lowering the vehicle! |
|
|
Replying to: ateixeira (Jun 24, 2009 9:16 am) Anyway..... I'm getting a bit off topic so i'll stop hijacking the thread now. |
|
|
|
I am giving serious thought to turning in my '98 Explorer under the C4C program and would likely look at smaller SUV's. There seem to be quite a few good vehicles in the category. 2009 Forester is one of my favorites, but I noticed in Consumer Reports that it didn't score too well on reliability- I think it was ranked as average. Does anyone know what is hurting the reliability score? I can't find any information on that. Maybe just typical first-year issues? To me dependability is big issue and if the Forester is just average that's a concern. Thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: maybesubie1 (Jun 29, 2009 7:21 pm) Subaru is currently well below average for initial problems with cars. Still, "well below average" means they have 1 or 2 more problems per vehicle than the best cars. I'd suggest waiting for the '10's as they should have '09 TBS's addressed during assembly. CU ratings are sometimes hard to decipher (a car that does well in measurements may be rated lower in total, when compared to other brands) but in absolute terms, everything for '09 Forester appears to rate as "better" save fuel system and power equipment, which rate "better-average". I'd suggest researching your potential dealer to make sure they have a good service department and will fix whatever warranted problems you encounter. |
|
|
Replying to: maybesubie1 (Jun 29, 2009 7:21 pm) Still, the average car today is very reliable, much more so than, say, in the 1980s. Having said that, we have all sort of conflicting early information: JD Powers says it's slightly below average in their IQS study. CR predicts "Average" reliability. TrueDelta recorded promising early numbers and the Forester stands out as one of the most reliable new cars for them. Hard to say what that means in the long-term. I had a 1998 Forester, which was the very first, and it gave me 9 great years of service and even sold for 40% of what I paid originally, so I'm not concerned. |
|
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
