Last post on Nov 10, 2013 at 9:44 PM
You are in the Subaru Forester
What is this discussion about?
Subaru Forester, Car Buying, Wagon
#200 of 260 Re: XT got traded [laszlo9]
Sep 18, 2013 (5:00 pm)
Remember I traded a previous turbo Forester for the new one. Economy was not my objective particularly with either one! However the 2014 seems to get about 25% better mpg than the 2010 and with far less noise and vibration. For CAFE reasons, that is important for Subaru if not for you and me. I see the XT as a lower insurance rate WRX wagon with better outward vision.
The only downside from the update is a firmer ride which is balanced by better high speed handling.
If the XT turbo had not been offered this year I probably would have purchased an RDX. The Premium XT's pricing was enough lower than the RDX to convince me to buy. The Touring XT would have lost to the RDX. I doubt that the loads of garbage accessories on the Touring will hold their value at trade-in time. Of course an RDX is likely to depreciate more than the XT Premium.
Sep 21, 2013 (7:47 pm)
Comparing my '14 XT to former '09 XT, the 14's more responsive (particularly in sport mode - in sport# mode it gets confused), yet still manages to get the same or a little better fuel economy.
Granted, if you want max. mileage out of a Forester, the '14 2.5 engine will give you better fuel economy with slightly better acceleration. Also, that's the only version you can get the new 6 speed manual on, though you'll burn more gas with that one.
My only worry is, being a direct injection engine, it may suffer from carbon buildup.
#202 of 260 Re: 14 XT driveline [kurtamaxxxguy]
Sep 22, 2013 (11:15 am)
"the 14's more responsive (particularly in sport mode - in sport# mode it gets confused), yet still manages to get the same or a little better fuel economy."
A little better fuel economy surprises me. I'll have to try that and see if I get the same result.
#203 of 260 Any must have options on the 2.5i Premium w/ Manual Trans?
Sep 24, 2013 (12:23 pm)
I am looking at a 2014 Forester 2.5i Premium with Manual Transmission and the All Weather Package. Are there any other must have options/accessories any current owners would recommend that are really good to have, but difficult to install afterwards? As I meet the dealer this weekend, I would like to get additional accessories bundled if they don't back down on price much.
#204 of 260 Re: 14 XT driveline [kurtamaxxxguy]
Sep 25, 2013 (5:49 am)
I need to disagree with your speculation that a 2014 Forester 6 speed will "burn more gas" than the CVT. I purchased my 6 speed Premium in late July and have 1700+ miles on it. My best highway MPG (in the Colorado mountains--primarily on Slumgullion Pass between Gunnison and Creede, and then between Creede and Denver-- has been 38.4! Not a fluke. I've driven the pass three times now. Denver to Gunnison? 36+ mpg. And the 6 speed has plenty of pep and acceleration. (*I* have no idea who would want a turbo...seems like a waste of money and fuel.) So please don't speculate on subjects not tested. I will be posting my own review soon.
#205 of 260 Re: Any must have options on the 2.5i Premium w/ Manual Trans? [zombiebombie]
Sep 25, 2013 (6:21 am)
I only have about 1700 miles on my 2014 Forester Premium manual 6 speed, so my opinion may still change, but here are the accessories I have and I see no need for others at this point: Back bumper cover, splash guards, all-weather floor mats, and locking wheel nuts. These were already on the car; the salesman was not responsive when I told him we really didn't need the floor mats (which I could have purchased a nice set for half the Subaru cost) and the locking nuts (we live in rural Colorado--really not needed.) The bumper cover and the splash guards are a MUST. With the heavily-tinted rear windows, I've not seen a big need for an auto-dimming rear view mirror. Just IMHO. Overall, I love my new Forester. The 6 speed transmission is getting an easy 35 mpg on the highway (not the interstate, the highway) and about 26 around town. The pattern is a little hard to get used to, as it's fairly tight, but I'm getting better. Make sure you're OK with the driver's seat--the lumbar support is pronounced, even at completely deflated. I love the turning radius and the great cornering in our Colorado mountain passes. The all-weather package (i.e. heated seats, etc.) comes standard with the manual transmission version, so don't let them charge you extra. I don't miss the sun roof--I've always thought snow and sun roofs don't mix. 'Hope this helps.
#206 of 260 Re: Gray Leather [jmf100]
Sep 25, 2013 (6:27 am)
I don't think the light gray interior is very practical in a Forester. I found some inexpensive black covers on the internet (that allow for the side airbags) that I placed over my cloth seats, but if you've put out for leather seats that would not be something you would want to do.
#207 of 260 Re: 14 XT driveline [colocate]
Sep 25, 2013 (7:48 am)
Nice that your MPG's far better than Subaru claims!
Subaru says their 2.5 CVT has better MPG (27 mpg combined) than their 6 speed manual (24 mpg combined).
Of course, depending on driver, trip type and fuel quality, MPG will differ.
I've no personal experience for 2.5 MPG's as I drive the XT, which given the mix of short and long trips I have, gets 24 - 25 MPG mixed (Subaru claims 23 MPG mixed). Reason for turbo, IMHO, is quicker vehicle response when passing or otherwise (I've driven 2.5i and found it a little slow in coping with our Portland OR traffic), and quieter CVT operation (turbo CVT has new belt design).
#208 of 260 Re: Any must have options on the 2.5i Premium w/ Manual Trans? [colocate]
Sep 25, 2013 (8:13 am)
wow! You high mpg folks have my attention. I need to take another look at the Forester, I dismissed it because it outgrew my idea of what the Forester should be (gen 1&2 sized).
#209 of 260 Re: Any must have options on the 2.5i Premium w/ Manual Trans? [once_for_all]
Sep 25, 2013 (10:49 am)
CR got 26mpg in theirs, which is best in class. It matched the old Escape hybrid.
IIRC our 2009 model got 22mpg in their tests, so a significant improvement for the CVT.
Back then the manual got 24mpg, so it's anyone's guess as to whether or not it would beat the new CVT. The new engine is also more efficient so it should beat 24mpg, at least.