CD Article: 2009 Subaru Forester

[mmret]

So they only have enough 5AT production for the Tribeca and LGT?

Weak.

[2hondas]

Seeing how Subaru does "facelifts" every couple years (ie. on the Impreza), they will probably upgrade the 4AT to 5AT then.

[carcrazy]

To be fair to Subaru, Toyota uses a 4 A/T in the RAV4 I4 and nobody (including the car reviewers) seem to be very concerned about it.

[si]

To be fair to Subaru, Toyota uses a 4 A/T in the RAV4 I4 and nobody (including the car reviewers) seem to be very concerned about it.

Comparing an entry level RAV4 to a Forester XT is not fair.

[Greg B.]

Oh, good. It's been at least two weeks since the last time the site featured an article on a Subaru.

It was 4 weeks, and 10 weeks before that.

But who's counting, right? Apparently, you.

I figured the delay in the usual biweekly Subaru features over the last while was because either the Subies wouldn't start in the dead of winter, or that their PR guy had relocated to warmer climes for the duration.

[carcrazy]

To be fair to Subaru, Toyota uses a 4 A/T in the RAV4 I4 and nobody (including the car reviewers) seem to be very concerned about it.

Comparing an entry level RAV4 to a Forester XT is not fair.

True, but for the non-XT models (3 out of 4) you can. RAV4 has also Base, Sport and Ltd with 4 bangers and 4 A/T.
The RAV4 I4 is exactly the car Forester will compete with. No real point to compare to the V6 models.

[Arhidia]

The new forester looks great. I like how it's more of a SUV than a wagon. It seems like Subaru is getting away from their wagon image. Forester (wagon --> SUV), Impreza (wagon --> hatch).

[si]

To be fair to Subaru, Toyota uses a 4 A/T in the RAV4 I4 and nobody (including the car reviewers) seem to be very concerned about it.

Comparing an entry level RAV4 to a Forester XT is not fair.

True, but for the non-XT models (3 out of 4) you can. RAV4 has also Base, Sport and Ltd with 4 bangers and 4 A/T.
The RAV4 I4 is exactly the car Forester will compete with. No real point to compare to the V6 models.

There wouldn't be much of an outrage here if the new Forester also offered a better AT like the RAV4, but they don't.

Whether it's styling, pricing, options, or trannys, leave it to Subaru to keep something amiss.

[Craig]

Oh, good. It's been at least two weeks since the last time the site featured an article on a Subaru.

It was 4 weeks, and 10 weeks before that.

But who's counting, right? Apparently, you.

I'd prefer if you knew what you were complaining about, but until that happens, someone has to do the math for you.

I figured the delay in the usual biweekly Subaru features over the last while was because either the Subies wouldn't start in the dead of winter, or that their PR guy had relocated to warmer climes for the duration.

Just a thought...why not complain about Subies not starting?

[Mitlov]

I know its probably an engineering "necessity", but the hood-scoop schnoz just really puts me off.

I like it.  And yes, I do believe it's an engineering necessity, given the boxer's unique layout.  I think the intercooler has to be top-mounted instead of front-mounted, due to packaging.

Also, I've never heard of Subarus overheating, whereas that was a known issue with both the Mazdaspeed3 and 335i when they were introduced...

[Trainman]

I think I have found my replacement for the Pathy.  It has improved approach and departure angles as well as increased ground clearance (compared to the old Forester).  4spd/5spd AT, does it matter much?  As long as it works well with the power/torque band of the motor.

I just need to wait 3 years for some to come off-lease and pick up one then   

[carcrazy]

To be fair to Subaru, Toyota uses a 4 A/T in the RAV4 I4 and nobody (including the car reviewers) seem to be very concerned about it.

Comparing an entry level RAV4 to a Forester XT is not fair.

True, but for the non-XT models (3 out of 4) you can. RAV4 has also Base, Sport and Ltd with 4 bangers and 4 A/T.
The RAV4 I4 is exactly the car Forester will compete with. No real point to compare to the V6 models.

There wouldn't be much of an outrage here if the new Forester also offered a better AT like the RAV4, but they don't.

Whether it's styling, pricing, options, or trannys, leave it to Subaru to keep something amiss.

Don't get me wrong. I too think that a 2009 redesigned model should have at least a 5 A/T, but all I was saying is that the Subaru is not alone.

The styling, both interior and exterior, still doesn't resonate with me, but I admit it's a much better vehicle than the outgoing model and if it's priced right, it will appeal to a much larger audience.

[Rupert]

I liked the Forrester because it was more of a lower deck level wagon than an SUV. I wonder if that resonates with the current owners. Markets come and go and maybe this is the sweet spot for this vehicle. Competing with all of the other far less practical small SUVs seems to be folly to me. I think that holding the wagon image is the way to go here and maybe it is only the price of it that prevents a lerger market. Note that Ford have dropped their Focus wagon so that there are possible customers to be picked up there and I wonder if a front wheel drive only cheaper version could be added to the line-up. Don't make it look like a stripper from the outward appearance though. Lets face it most of us never experience conditions when front wheel drive will not do the job. A while ago I owned an 89 Isuzu Trooper. Kept it for 10 years and probably enjoyed it more than any other vehicle. Rust got it in the end but it still ran great. During that time of daily use and camping trips I only had recourse to use the 4WD once when 2W may not have done the job. If it had been only rear wheel drive it would not have made any difference to me. This vehicle was not full time 4WD or AWD, whatever, though.
Maybe this brand will have to live with the market penetration that it has. Bring back Mick.

[Demosthenes X]

Subaru has built their brand around their AWD system for the last thirteen years.  Doubt they're going to drop that core element of their identity to sell a few more Foresters - nor would I want them too.

[sirAQUAMAN64]

Everyone should know by now I'm a Tiguan freak, but the new Forester really appeals to me too (well, behind the Tiguan and B-Class). It certainly ranks above the CR-V, RAV, Rogue, and VUE. And it appeals to me much more than the previous generation which I just found far too small.

Appreciate the clean yet athletic exterior - complete with hood scoop, well designed interior - don't know about the plastics but the layout is pleasant, nice upright X-Trail-ish greenhouse that's airy and boxy useful for the large cargo space, it's still pretty compact (shorter than an Impreza sedan), 170hp/220-whatever horsepower seems adequate/punchy, reviewers are noting its excellent handling and ride, plus Subaru's renown AWD system. Also, the option combinations seem decent (kept the large-ish sunroof) although some like me may want an XT without leather. Agree the biggest omissions are transmission related, a 6MT/5AT/MT on XT. Looking forward to pricing, but think if that's competitive this could be a very big seller for Subaru. The market is getting extremely crowded, but this could potentially be their #1 or runner-up best seller.

[sailor723]

Subaru has built their brand around their AWD system for the last thirteen years.  Doubt they're going to drop that core element of their identity to sell a few more Foresters - nor would I want them too.

They actually got out of building front wheel drive some years ago because they couldn't give them away

[inco]

I agree - if they price it right.  Decisions, decisions = AWD and no TDI or TDI and no AWD. What should I do?

[Demosthenes X]

There was a thread a while back about a potential diesel Forester...  I wonder what ever came of that?  Is Subaru planning a diesel for the NA market?  If so:   A Forester with a tough, torque diesel would be perfect as a fuel efficient, practical runabout during the week, and a fairly capable off-roader for the weekend, with enough room to pack all your gear.

[Arhidia]

I liked the Forrester because it was more of a lower deck level wagon than an SUV. I wonder if that resonates with the current owners. Markets come and go and maybe this is the sweet spot for this vehicle. Competing with all of the other far less practical small SUVs seems to be folly to me. I think that holding the wagon image is the way to go here and maybe it is only the price of it that prevents a lerger market. Note that Ford have dropped their Focus wagon so that there are possible customers to be picked up there and I wonder if a front wheel drive only cheaper version could be added to the line-up. Don't make it look like a stripper from the outward appearance though. Lets face it most of us never experience conditions when front wheel drive will not do the job. A while ago I owned an 89 Isuzu Trooper. Kept it for 10 years and probably enjoyed it more than any other vehicle. Rust got it in the end but it still ran great. During that time of daily use and camping trips I only had recourse to use the 4WD once when 2W may not have done the job. If it had been only rear wheel drive it would not have made any difference to me. This vehicle was not full time 4WD or AWD, whatever, though.
Maybe this brand will have to live with the market penetration that it has. Bring back Mick.

I disagree. I think wagons aren't very attractive to most people and that's why Subaru has made some image changes. Subaru will probably become more appealing to many more buyers now.

[Seafoam]

The new forester looks great. I like how it's more of a SUV than a wagon. It seems like Subaru is getting away from their wagon image. Forester (wagon --> SUV), Impreza (wagon --> hatch).

I agree it's not so much a tall wagon anymore. There is a hint of Rav4 Grand Vitara,and Santa Fe. These vehicles are all starting to look the same.