Subaru Forester

Home Forum Chat Forum Subaru Forester

Viewing 35 posts - 1 through 35 (of 35 total)
  • Subaru Forester
  • Premier Icon T666DOM
    Subscriber

    Anybody owned a Forester and can give me an idea what they’re like to live with. Currently have an A4 Avant diesel (and yes I did own an Orange 5 but no job in IT!!) we want a 4×4 and the Forester ticks the right boxes.

    We only do about 9k miles a year so the 2.0 petrol engine may be OK, what sort of real world mpg do you get. I’d like the 2.5 for the extra grunt but I imagine I’d not be passing too many petrol stations!!

    Any info appreciated.

    The 2.0 petrol does 25-27mpg IME,the 2.5 turbo about 22-24,easy cars to live with,good build quality,I’ve had 3 so far,but a 17 year old son meant I had to ditch the 2.5XT

    hora
    Member

    My 2.0 N/A did 30 average. Fantastic car. The one car that I loved. If pushed I’d say the gear shift could have been clearer but thats it. If you only do 9k a year I’d seriously look at the 2.5T Forester.

    Premier Icon Capt. Kronos
    Subscriber

    Ace car, loads of fun and very capable… BUT… spares cost a whole load and could have rather long lead times (or could with the older ones, things may have improved).

    I loved mine, but the cost of replacing bits that fell off it, and the 4 weeks delivery times, finished the ownership experience for me.

    zokes
    Member

    but a 17 year old son meant I had to ditch the 2.5XT

    ????

    Premier Icon T666DOM
    Subscriber

    I do fancy the 2.5, you can pick up the later 2009 models for decent money, easily enough to cover the extra premium for the diesel. Thinking with my head might have to go for the 2.0, aren’t spares more reasonable for them?

    hora
    Member

    Don’t forget post-2006 means a higher VED on some models.

    Insurers wanted £5-8k to put him on the insurance,so goodbye Forester.

    Premier Icon jam bo
    Subscriber

    If you like the Audi, why not trade for a Quattro version. My a3 tdi Quattro averages 42mpg.

    Premier Icon T666DOM
    Subscriber

    That is a consideration with the 2.5 hora, 2.0 and diesel aren’t too bad

    Premier Icon T666DOM
    Subscriber

    We want something with a bit more ground clearance, and the wife wants to be sat a bit higher up, maybe I’ll get her a booster seat!!

    Premier Icon mikewsmith
    Subscriber

    2.5 petrol here and I would cry filling it up in the UK, seems cheaper as the tank is tiny!

    Load space seems a little shorter than our old octavia, my bikes don’t go in stood up anymore which is a pain. Not that zippy for the size of engine under there really – missus bought it so thats that really.

    Premier Icon cp
    Subscriber

    Legacy outback also an option. Or a normal Legacy if you can do without the extra ground clearance.

    Premier Icon cp
    Subscriber

    What parts did you have trouble getting hold of Capt.Kronos?

    Regular bits and bobs for my Legacy (brake pads, discs, routine servicing etc…) have not been a problem at all to get and no more costly really than VW etc… equivalents.

    I know some bits are silly expensive – complete exhuasts for example it’s much cheaper to get a stainless one made. Likewise new replacement wheels are silly silly expensive.

    hora
    Member

    If you can afford/budget- a diesel Legacy would be ideal. I had both the Legacy and the Forester. The Legacy was very capable. The Forester was more agricultural.

    Premier Icon richmars
    Subscriber

    I’ve run a 2.0 non turbo for about 3 years. Get about 32mpg. Can’t fault it. I go off road every week end, in some fairly deep mud/snow and it’s been fine. Low ratio may help, which I don’t think you get on the turbos.
    It’s 10 years old but only 90k miles, so still had 2 cam-belts which are expensive to fit.

    Zedsdead
    Member

    If you’re going down the petrol route then do it properly and get the wrx engined turbo!

    mpg is mid 20’s. Performance is far more interesting. You’ll have a tonne more fun and filling it up won’t bother you so much. Very much a wolf in sheeps clothing. Albeit a bloody ugly sheep.

    Getting hold of spares isn’t a problem, found working on them is a bit of a pain due to them squeezing everything into a tight space. However it’s fine really, just takes a little more time. Reliability is good, only had to replace rear bushes and a wheel bearing in 7 years. Everything else has been regular service items.
    Interior is no Audi but it serves it’s purpose and does it’s job.

    Premier Icon JustAnotherLogin
    Subscriber

    I’ve got a new shaped diesel version and that does about 45 mpg. Wife gets a bit less on her daily commute but we have got over 50 from it when sensible motorway cruising.

    Can’t really say it’s ‘agricultural’. It’s quite plain true but I suspect it’s the same fittings as the legacy just a different shape.

    Premier Icon T666DOM
    Subscriber

    I don’t mind the looks of the forester, prefer them to the outback to be honest, and the extra clearance is what we’re after.

    willb
    Member

    got one of the newer diesel ones, great workhorse, 43 mpg all day every day, makes little difference how you drive it, just had first service at 12000 miles, £238, great on muddy grass, no snow yet to test it. recently went to dublin mtb from ni, 4 bikes on back all kit inside plus 4 blokes, 80mph whole way and still 43 average.

    zokes
    Member

    Insurers wanted £5-8k to put him on the insurance,so goodbye Forester.

    So get him to buy his own car and pay for his own insurance?

    Sodajim
    Member

    I’ve had the 2.5 XT for about 4 years. Not a bad car but the fuel economy is eye watering if you push it hard, well into the teens per gallon and its not got a big tank so even pootling to work (about 25 miles per day both ways) I’m filling up once a week. Nearly every annual service is a major one of sorts so £4/500, though to be fair in 50,000 miles its only need an oil pump under warranty and the brains replaced in the remote alarm gubbins for £300. Insurance is high too considering it’s not worth a lot.

    Edit: to summarise I personally wouldn’t buy the 2.5 turbo again! The speed benefit over a normal soft roaders/estates is too much for most roads anyway to offset the fuel costs for me nowdays

    Premier Icon T666DOM
    Subscriber

    That was how my thoughts were going Sodajim, fuel costs versus purchase price would even itself out, I imagined repair bills would be more costly with the 2.5T

    Sodajim
    Member

    I’m not sure if the repair bills with the 2.5 T would be more than the 2.0 T say, as I would imagine they are essentially all the same parts.

    Same with the N/A versions to some extent, the services costs seem to increase with maintaining all the diffs etc which I assume they all share.

    I don’t think you really buy a Subaru because it’s a cheap car to run, but if you can swallow the costs they do seem fairly safe and hassle free (excluding the ragged to death not maintained Scooby WRX etc of course).

    The cost of up changing to a newer more sensible car stops me from selling mine. It’s in good nick, it’s all fine and it’s still a nice comfy practical car so I put the difference to running it. Better the devil you know.

    Final note don’t worry about finding one with the sat nav. It works fine but the maps are so out dated its quicker to ask directions! £400 for a new map DVD, don’t think so thanks buy a Tom Tom!

    reynolds853
    Member

    We were upgraded to a 2.0 forester on a recent trip to africa. Picked it up at the airport in Winhoeke with just under 100 miles on the clock and added another 1000 over 10 days. Mostly gravel, dirt roads. Was nothing short of excellent…especially on the beach!!! Loads of power, pretty quiet, certainly very comfy. No problems over the duration of the hire except a chipped windscreen and punctured tire. Handling was brilliant, in all conditions, even the limited bits of tarmac. As I recall the efficiency was great…it needs to be when petrol stations are few and far between.

    Premier Icon mikewsmith
    Subscriber

    2.0 must be a lot better than the 2.5 🙂 I get worried about running out in Tasmania

    Had an ’06 from almost new, great car, brilliant in snow, (and we get a lot over here).

    2.0 engine, has done 130,000KM and no issues, serviced at regular intervals and ignored in between, just as a car should be.

    MTB/CX fits in the back with the seats still in place, bonus for dragging the family along to races.

    hora
    Member

    Again if you are near Hebden Bridge or Irlam there are good Subaru Indies with racing and mech experience of Subaru’s.

    Expensive? Seen the costs on VW? 😉

    I had my Forester sideways numerous times. Never was I scared. I remember driving it from Hudds to Stalybridge at speed at night in high winds. Weirdly the airflow helped it flow into dips etc in the NSL. Fantastic car. Not quite MX5 but very very close. As with any AWD..buy in Summer sell in winter

    Premier Icon maccruiskeen
    Subscriber

    What parts did you have trouble getting hold of Capt.Kronos?

    Regular bits and bobs for my Legacy (brake pads, discs, routine servicing etc…) have not been a problem at all to get and no more costly really than VW etc… equivalents.

    from my sister in laws experience with her legacy its not service items but repair items that take time. She had her car broken into and a failed attempt to steel it and had to leave it unsecured (and undriveable) for weeks because locks and ignition / steering column bits took ages to arrive in stock. So servicing is fine but breakages and breakdowns less so.

    hora
    Member

    Subaru salvage is the answer.

    Premier Icon seadog101
    Subscriber

    My 05 plate 2.0X is fab. Really spacey and comfortable. The only car I’ve driven that I’ve liked being in for a long time. It’s the basic model, but has everything you need. Not too thirtsy, but not great by modern standards. Servicing can be costly if you do lots of miles.

    Mrs Seadog likes it because of the winterproofness.

    Test drove the 2.5 turbo. Scared me poopless. Totally unrequired level of performance from a family wagon.

    Premier Icon markgraylish
    Subscriber

    I looked at getting a Forester a couple of years ago just as the new model hit the market.
    I test drove the old and the new model back-to-back and immediately ruled out the old model as the ride was terrible. Also, the rear leg room is useless if you have tall people in the front. Headroom in the old model is fine but that’s because you feel like you are sitting on the floor – nothing wrong with that per se, just a bit odd in a ‘SUV’

    I ended up with an X-Trail though as the new model Forester would have worked out way over our budget by the time we added the necessary goodies..

    (My buddy has old model Forester and I often end up sitting behind his 6ft wife so can attest to the poor leg room. I’m 6’4″…)

    hora
    Member

    The Japanese aren’t really that tall…

    mtbmatt
    Member

    I was looking at Foresters and Legacys. Came close to getting one but just couldn’t get over the fuel economy.
    Depending how much you want to spend I’d look at Octavia Scout diesel or Volvo XC70 D5.

    If you want something cheaper, then we have just got a Octavia 4×4 (not scout). Early days, but ticks the boxes.

    Premier Icon maccruiskeen
    Subscriber

    The Japanese aren’t really that tall…

    Its a good job they hardly export any cars then 🙂

Viewing 35 posts - 1 through 35 (of 35 total)

The topic ‘Subaru Forester’ is closed to new replies.