Last post on Sep 21, 2012 at 7:25 AM
You are in the Subaru Legacy & Outback
What is this discussion about?
Subaru Legacy, Subaru Outback, Subaru Forester, Car Buying, Car Comparisons, Sedan, Wagon
Jul 28, 2009 (10:19 am)
We currently own a 2009 Outback (love it) and (lease) at 2007 Chevy Impala. The lease on the Impala is up in about 6 months so we have started shopping around to get some ideas. We bought the Outback about 7 months ago and it was our first ever Subaru...and we love it! The solid feel, quiet ride and of course the AWD is great. Anyway, my wife and I are now heading back to Subaru to perhaps purchase another and become a 2-subie family. Prior to purchasing the Outback we also test drove a Forrester. I was wondering if anyone has ever owned both an Outback and Forrester and could give me some input as to which they preferred to drive? Any real difference in quality? Any experiance would be appreciated!
#218 of 1296 Re: Thoughts? [jccinoh]
Jul 28, 2009 (11:06 am)
A notable difference is place of manufacture: Forester = Japan; Outback = Lafayette Indiana assembly with about one half of the components from Japan or other foreign origin.
If I remember correctly, Consumer Reports' historical reliability ratings favor the Forester over the Outback or Legacy. With neither heco en Mexico, both are a good bet.
The Forester has the same passenger compartment room as the new Outback, but less cargo capacity and is shorter to park. A fully accesorized Forester is not much cheaper than a similar Outback. A stripped Forester is still a nice car at a very good price. The Forester has a less isolated ride than the Outback.
#219 of 1296 Re: Thoughts? [jccinoh]
Jul 28, 2009 (12:40 pm)
The Forester may be a bit more fun to drive, but the Outback will be quieter and a bit more comfortable. The new 2010 Outback actually gets better EPA ratings for the H4 model than the Forester H4.
#220 of 1296 Mixed Feelings
Jul 28, 2009 (3:57 pm)
Test drove a 2010 Outback and a 2010 Forester last weekend and really was impressed with CVT, which showed 2K RPM at 70 MPH. Too bad the Forester lacks it - or even the 5 speed AT or the H-6. But, the '10 Forester was much peppier than my '03 Forester.
But I digress: what are the differences between the '09 and '10 Foresters? Same engine, tranny, output, etc. Anything else? I ask because I really LOVE the HUGE sunroof on Foresters and don't want to give that up for the Outback, as nice as it is. Talk to me!
#221 of 1296 Re: Mixed Feelings [gmginsfo]
Jul 28, 2009 (4:50 pm)
As to the '10 Forester? Minor stuff. New instruments with white needles, Bluetooth now part of the NAVI and the mic incorporated in the ceiling by the reading lamps, the X Premium comes with a standard power driver's seat, AWD badge added on rear hatch below Subaru name, there's a new color (sort of a dark orange); that's about it.
#222 of 1296 Re: Mixed Feelings [gmginsfo]
Jul 28, 2009 (9:24 pm)
My experiences when comparing '09 Outback and Forester XT models is the Outback handled rough roads with less trauma than the Forester did. My hunch is the Forester has weak rebound damping (especially in the rear) which causes its wheels to "dance" over heavilly rutted surfaces like multiple road craters. The better damped Outback had no such problem.
However, the Outback leaned a lot more in turns, and its turbo was far peakier and needed more revs to engage.
My hunch is the shock characteristics will be the same for the '10 models.
And as an aside:
Any Forester fanatics out there have suggestions for shocks with better rebound damping than stockers?
#223 of 1296 Re: Mixed Feelings [kurtamaxxxguy]
Jul 29, 2009 (8:17 am)
Lots of concern expressed here about non-folding mirrors. Certainly it was a cost-cutting move, and folding ones would be preferable, but...
having owned 28 vehicles over more years than I wish to think about, I have only broken one side mirror in all that time (my fault)...on an Oldsmobile Touring Sedan. My body shop was able to screw the plastic housing back on, fill the resulting holes and touch up the paint for very little $$. No one was the wiser when the car was traded in, and the new owner was pleased with car's condition.
If you are so unfortunate as to damage a folding mirror, it is even more expensive to replace. I actually prefer power folding mirrors, but they would be even more $$ if they ever needed repair. Bottom line, if I like the vehicle, the lack of folding mirrors would never be a deal breaker for me. To each their own.
#225 of 1296 Counterpoint from a Forester owner
Jul 29, 2009 (11:42 am)
I've always been a Forester fan, so I will step up to defend it.
Truth be known, on paper the Legacy/Outback often do better, we thought the same when we got our 2002 Legacy L. But...ownership experience wasn't nearly as rewarding as either of our Forester, 98 or 2009. Not even close. My wife may even say her Legacy was her least favorite car ever, while her new 2009 Forester is her favorite.
Some things are hard to quantify, but the Forester is just ... user-friendly. It has a tidier exterior size, you sit up a lot higher and can see everything and everybody, you feel like a King. The OB is higher than the Legacy but you're still not sitting on a King's Perch by a long shot.
The new 2009 Forester is very attractive, the 2010 Outback, to my eyes, is not. I could get over that, I'm sure, but the Forester's styling is easy to love. The Outback has a great personality.
Mind you it's not ugly, just not as attractive as the 05-09.
Forget the EPA cubic feet numbers, the Forester has a box-shaped cargo hold and the Outback does not. Sure the floor is a tad wider and longer, only a tad, but the rear glass impedes so badly that you'll need to fold the seats to fit a single large box. There's no reason the hatch glass shouldn't be a FOOT farther back, seriously. Great floor space, awful cargo height. So you can pack things in, but when you try to close the hatch - DOH! Gotra re-arrange the cargo again.
Good thing is has a cool roof rack with hidden cross bars. You'll use it often!
Where did the cool dual moonroof go? One small one? That's it? This is an $800 moonroof compared to the Forester's $2000 stadium-like retractable roof.
Night and day. $1200 value added, IMHO. The price is $2700 lower but factor in the moonroof and call it $4 grand.
The folding mirror doesn't matter until your wife drives into the 4x4 supporting our car port. On the 2002 Legacy it was a white paint stain, on the OB it would be 5 of our $100 Subaru Bucks certificates down the drain.
Gunma build quality > SIA in Indiana. Close, but true.
Forester has a useable eBrake. For steep inclines, playing in the snow, etc. I would miss it.
Angles of approach, departure, and break-over angles will be better on the Forester. Ground clearance is just the beginning. I'm sure the Outback's cladding will get caught up way, WAAAAAAY before the Forester's does. Park the OB and hike to where the Forester will take you.
My biggest gripe, though, is that in the higher price class where the Outback competes, it's lacking the soft-touch plastics that you might expect. It's a tiny bit better than the Forester, perhaps, but the Forester compares better with other vehicles in its price range.
Basically if I were willing to step up and pay $30 grand for a loaded Outback, as opposed to $25 grand for a loaded Forester, it's missing the things I would expect to get in that price range.
That's not quite fair - it's not $30 grand, but you get my point.
How much is a 2010 OB 2.5i Limited CVT? With a moonroof?
Jul 29, 2009 (11:54 am)
OK so I looked it up.
2010 Forester X 2.5 Limited pseudo-convertible: $25,185
2010 Outback 2.5i Limited w/mini-Moonroof: $28,235
So I'm looking at spending over $3 grand extra and still giving up the most visible feature I love about the Forester - that huge moonroof.
I guess $28k is not a lot of money these days, I dunno. You could argue the extras it gets are worth it to some folks, but I'd still wait for the Forester to get the CVT and the best bits from the new Outback and get that instead, even if it takes until 2012 for the mid-cycle refresh.