Last post on Aug 26, 2009 at 12:14 PM
You are in the Subaru Forester
What is this discussion about?
Subaru Forester, Wagon, SUV
First Drive: 2009 Subaru Forester XT - First Impressions: The style factor is up, but so is the practicality.(more)
Full Test: 2009 Subaru Forester 2.5XT Limited - Bottom Line: Bigger and better, the quirky little Forester has become a grown-up SUV. (more)
Jun 02, 2008 (10:32 am)
They list 0-60 for the XT at 6.2 seconds, quicker than a V6 RAV4.
MT got 6.6, and Edmunds got 6.8. That's what we've seen so far.
The rest of the C&D review is generally positive but they didn't do a fully instrumented test, so hopefully we get more in a comparo soon.
#53 of 71 Re: Not good enough? [dcampagna]
Jun 02, 2008 (2:06 pm)
Although I know it's subjective, I just can't get over how ugly the new CR-V looks. I much preferred the more functional/utilitarian look of the previous generation.
As for Toyota having more reliable drivetrains... didn't I just read somewhere that Toyota felt it necessary to extend the warranties on older RAV4s due to drivetrain problems? Just goes to show you that nobody is perfect
P.S. I agree with Juice, you go 10 years with no problems with either wheel bearings or head gaskets (both of which were addressed by Subaru) and then you use those as reasons why you didn't get another
#54 of 71 Re: Good article but odd pricing comparison [kurtamaxxxguy]
Jun 27, 2008 (7:18 am)
I find it also weird that any comparisons so far have refrained from mentioning the Nissan Rogue, even tho the Rogue is only a first year car...
#55 of 71 Re: Good article but odd pricing comparison [dcwestby]
Jun 27, 2008 (8:17 am)
Motor Trend addressed that in its recent 5-way compario and I remember the Rogue coming in second, mainly because of the way it handled (ride was pretty harsh, though).
#56 of 71 Re: Good article but odd pricing comparison [dcwestby]
Jun 30, 2008 (8:25 am)
I think perhaps it's because the Rogue is a tad smaller and *really* pushes the styling envelope, so it's form over function.
Forester is much more conservative, and function over form.
One's an egg, the other is a box. We're practical so we prefer the box.
#57 of 71 2009 Forester Air Conditioner inadequacies
Jul 08, 2008 (4:31 pm)
Has anyone with a new 2009 forester had trouble keeping comfortable in 80 to 90 deg days? My AC is not up to the task of keeping the car cool. On a sunny day, there is so much glass that the AC will not overcome the heat load. The dealer tested my AC and says that it meets factory specs. However I am still not able to keep the inside temperature below about 80deg, even with the recirculating air setting.
#58 of 71 Re: 2009 Forester Air Conditioner inadequacies [phdewi]
Jul 08, 2008 (4:47 pm)
If you have a moon roof, the interior cover will get hot in sunlight (the moon roof is not well tinted) and put more load on the A/C.
You could either have the moon roof glass tinted, or (assuming you do not open the roof very often) put a windshield reflector in the space between the glass and the interior sliding cover.
Otherwise, my XT's A/C seems to do fine with our heat waves up here in Portland, OR. Then again, my XT's white (chosen to minimize summer heating).
#59 of 71 Re: 2009 Forester Air Conditioner inadequacies [phdewi]
Jul 16, 2008 (7:47 pm)
My Forester's ac seems to handle the heat ok here in Tulsa. The onboard thermometer read 100F at 5:00 today, and the air cooled it down as fast as most any other car ac I've had.
#60 of 71 Re: 2009 Forester Air Conditioner inadequacies [phdewi]
Jul 18, 2008 (8:57 am)
It's been quite warm in NJ the past few days, but I have had no problem with the A/C. I leave it parked all day at the train station. The only thing I do is put a sunshade in the front windshield.
If your car does not have the privacy glass, that also may cause the A/C to work harder.
Sep 03, 2008 (7:44 am)
Wrt the AC loads, I did get my moon roof tinted with 25% light reduction film. Made a big difference in summer heat load (sun roof interior cover doesn't get as hot) and did not obscure visibility out the moon roof all that much.). Cost was around $30.