Specifically, I’m thinking of buying a 2011 model, and wonder what, if anything, you folks think about it and how it matches up against its competitors like the seemingly ubiquitous RAV-4.
Dunno about the Forester, but I love my 2009 Outback in a way that’s more than a little inappropriate.
I have a 2000 Forester and have looked at the new models. The reviews I have seen have been good. I might buy one except that my old Forester only has 160,000 miles and is still running well. To be honest, I did have to get the clutch replaced recently, and an oil change, so it isn’t a perfect car.
Don’t remember where I saw it but the new Forester was rated better than the Rav-4.
I had a look in the current Outback, took it for a test drive. Very nice, my only concern was with the 2011 model at least is they have angled the windows in such a way as to limit visibility somewhat out the back.
I didn’t actually take a RAV-4 out for a test, I simply don’t like the projecting spare tyre on the back. Knowing me, it’s the sort of thing I’m bound to back up into stuff with.
I do see them all over the place, so they must be popular.
Here’s a comprehensive comparison. The one notable omission they didn’t test was the VW Tiguan.
The results are fairly uncontroversial compared to most other reviews. The Chevy Equinox is the pick of the litter at this point. The Honda CRV use to dominate the segment, but Honda is currently in between models - the current CRV is 5 or 6 years old and a new, redesigned model is coming out next year. The market prices should reflect this though, Honda dealers should be eager to get rid of 2011 CRVs to make room for the new model, while last time I checked GM was running the Equinox plant at full capacity and still struggling to meet demand.
As for the Forester, we had one of the last gens before we replaced it with a Dodge Journey. They are all AWD, so if you don’t need AWD you have no choice, the 4 speed automatic models are “on-demand” or “part time” AWD, which helps fuel economy to be somewhat equal to the 5 speed manual model, which has an extra gear ratio but is a “full time” AWD. I’m putting quotes around those terms because car makers use the terms to mean whatever they like and there is no industry wide standard. Basically the 'part time" ones have a clutch that engages the rear wheels when slip is detected electronically, and most of the time the rear wheels are free wheeling, while “full time” means there is an actual differential delivering power to all 4 wheels all the time.
Subarus are known for being very safe in a crash, due to judicious use of high strength boron steel in the car bodies. The current model is an IIHS “top pick”. However the other marques have not stayed complacent in this respect, the Equinox is also a “top pick” and scores very well in the 2011 revised NHTSA crash tests too (the Subaru has not yet been tested by the NHTSA for 2011), same goes for the Dodge Journey and Hyundai/Kia models. By comparison the CRV is not a top pick because it does relatively badly on the IIHS “roof crush” test, which was a test that they only recently implemented. Again, the CRV is an old truck.
The one glaring problem I’ve seen with the current generation Subarus is that their paint seems to be extremely thin and it’s apparently common to see 1 or 2 year old Subaru with huge swathes of rust and bubbling paint on the body, I’ve seen this on cars in Alberta where they don’t put salt on the roads. IIRC you are in Ontario, so it would be much worse. It’s a common issue and you can do a search to read up on it.
Other than that, the car is average or mediocre in most other respects. If you are going to look at the Forester I would urge you to also consider the Subaru Outback as well. It is prices similar (a little higher maybe) to the Forester with the same engine, but because it’s based on the platform of the larger Legazy, it has more room, a longer wheelbase and is all around a better car.
I forgot to mention that the Forester is imported from Japan, and they are still having problems over there with the natural disasters that are affecting production and thus supply. By comparison, the Equinox is made in Ingersoll or Oshawa, the RAV4 in Woodstock, and the CRV and Outback are both made in the US.
My mom has a 2010 Forester and she loves it. I don’t think she drove the RAV4, but she did a fair bit of research before buying.
Flipped over twice in a Forester doing highway speeds; all three of us walked out with nothing worse than some bruising from the seat belts.
Can’t speak to similar vehicles, but that car probably saved our lives.
We did indeed look at the Outback. I liked it. It was a tossup between these two cars. There were however two points in the Forester’s favour, for me (I know next to nothing about the technical aspects):
-
The Forester is smaller, which may I think make it easier to handle in an urban setting - finding parking and the like; and
-
The visibility while driving a Forester was very good. I found this less good in an Outback.
The Chevy Equinox is about the same size as the Outback - that is, a bit larger. I haven’t tried a ride in it yet, though.
The Outback had less engine noise, that’s for sure, and overall seemed to have a more luxurious feel to it.
The Outback is about 20cm longer than the Forester and similar in other exterior dimensions, so parking is really no different between either. The Legacy/Outback is lower in height (but ground clearance is the same) and has a longer wheelbase and wider track, all of which make for better driving dynamics. The base model Outback also uses a CVT transmission which delivers significantly better fuel economy than the outdated 4 speed auto in the Forester despite being a heavier vehicle.
I just looked at the NHTSA safety ratings again, and it seems there are actually new ratings for both (these have been updated since I last checked).
Legacy:
Front Driver: 4/5
Front Passenger: 4/5
Driver side: 5/5
Rear passenger side: 4/5
Rollover: 4/5
For the Forester:
Front Driver: 4/5
Front Passenger: 5/5
Driver side: 4/5
Rear passenger side: 2/5
Rollover: 4/5
We could really see no reason to pick the Forester over the outback.
I dunno, I’m giving my purely subjective impressions from test driving the two. On the Consumer’s Reports and APA sites, the Forester was rated higher overall, but not significantly. I don’t think there is all that much to choose between 'em, ratings-wise. I certainly preferred the Outback’s smooth and silent transmission - the Forester is very noisy, I found.
My reasons were that I found those extra few inches, combined with not as good visibility out the back, make it somewhat more difficult to handle when parallel parking.
The big point in the Forester’s favour is really all-around visibility. For example, when making a lane change to the left, I like to both glance over my shoulder and look in the side mirror to see that there is no-one in my blind spot. I can do that in a Forester, but not really in an Outback, because at least with the 2011 model I couldn’t see out the rear side all that well. Maybe I’d get used to it, but I just felt like I lacked an automatic sense of where everyone was on the road around me if I couldn’t see all around.
Huh. I am also interested in the Forester, but I assumed it was larger than the Outback since it’s more of a traditional SUV shape (despite being built on a regular car wheel base). However, I don’t know if I can swing the extra $3k for an Outback.
What really confuses me is why Subaru also uses the “Outback Sport” label on one of its Impreza models. Are the Outback Sport and regular Outback completely different models or just trim level different?
I think the “Outback Sport” is a trim level offered on the Impreza, confusingly enough …
It is unfortunate that Subaru discontinued the traditional Legacy station wagon in North America, as i think that would probably suit you better.
The Outback Sport is an Impreza hatchback with slightly raised suspension and strange body cladding. I don’t think we get those in Canada (any more?).
My wife has had her current generation RAV4 since they came out in 06’. It’s the limited edition model and I’d buy another one in a second. With the back seats lying flat there is a ton of room in the back. It handles like a car and even with the 4-cyl (also available in 6) it is very peppy off the line. Vision out is great with the large windows in every direction.
About the only problem I can think of with it is the rear door swings in the wrong direction, towards the curb if you’re parked at one.
I also looked at Subarus when looking at this and decided they were too small and too low riding.
My wife loves her Forester.
It’s getting kind of long in the tooth, but she still likes it.
Subaru occupies a warm place in my heart because of the following:
We bought the car used with around 35K miles on it. Over the next year and a half it began developing an odd sort of sound in the engine that made it sound like a diesel truck.
One day I drove it to the local auto shop and asked them to listen to it: they all gathered around the hood in awe and said things like “Is it still under warranty?”
I noticed that it had 59,500 miles on it, so I told my wife to stop driving it until we figured out if there was a warranty. I was skeptical. There was no way that Subaru was going to do anything for second-hand owners like us.
A couple of weeks later I took it into the Subaru dealer. They looked it over and declared the engine trashed. But they said there was hope: if I was able to prove I had changed the oil regularly they might be able to replace the engine under warranty—a factory warranty that would have expired at 60k.
When I was unable to produce the receipts (who keeps those?), they called in some expert technician dude from some distant place and told me that he would look at the internals of the motor and make the determination of our fate.
He came the next day and looked at the engine and found in our favor. They ordered a rebuilt engine and a week later we had essentially a brand-new engine, for free.
After a month we noticed that it was leaking oil a little bit, so I called them up. They had me bring it in and leave it overnight.
The next day the shop manager called to tell me that the new engine had a defect in its casting that allowed a tiny oil leak. He said they were ordering yet another engine.
Two weeks later we dropped the car off for a day and received our second free engine.
And that engine has been running well for years.
Normally, I might question the quality of their engines after having two replaced, but folks continue to rave about the boxer engines in those cars, so I figure it must have been the most random fluke. But the way we were treated by Subaru was no fluke: they earned my respect.
With few exceptions warranties follow the car regardless of owner, so I don’t think there’s anything special about the treatment you received. The car experienced a major failure withing the warranty period and they fixed it. That’s how it should be.
We’ve owned five Subarus in a row. 81, 86, 90, 94, and the current 2004 Forester. So I might be a fanboy of sorts. :o
Here’s a You Tube videocomparing Subaru’s AWD against some of the competition. As always YMMV.
That youtube video gets posted by a lot of Subaru people and is a good indication that the poster doesn’t understand how AWD works.
The only thing that is being demonstrated is that the (last generation boxy bodystyle) Subaru Forester was not equipped with traction contro/ESC while its newer, more modern competitors were. Today this would be considered a glaring safety defect as the US has made ESC mandatory on all new cars. Additionally, all the technical explanations given in that video are outright lies.