A couple of Forester questions

[Bill]

I have my eye on a new Forester. I have a couple of questions.

If it doesn't raise my insurance too much, I would like the turbo model.
How often does the air filter under the hood scoop need to be replaced?
How much does the filter cost?

I would like some opinions on the automatic vs. the 5 speed transmision.

I plan on using the car as normal transportation and also plan on taking
it on 'seasonal use' and some rough dirt roads. No real off-roading.

 

[randy.wells]

I have a 2003 xs Forester, and on ruff dirt roads it is awesome. However,
not on uneven pavement or off road.
Sounds like you really do not need the turbo unless you want the power and
in that case get the five speed. The 2 liter boxer runs really good and the
automatic transmission is a dream. The biggest drag is the cruise control;
which will run the rpms up to 4000 and stay there until you interrupt it. I
know the car well any more questions?

 

[Ignignokt]

I have a 2003 xs Forester, and on ruff dirt roads it is awesome.
However, not on uneven pavement or off road.
Sounds like you really do not need the turbo unless you want the
power and in that case get the five speed. The 2 liter boxer runs
really good and the automatic transmission is a dream. The biggest
drag is the cruise control; which will run the rpms up to 4000 and
stay there until you interrupt it. I know the car well any more
questions?

No problems at all with the cruise on my Forester. But I *have* been having
trouble with the transmission. Not mechanical problems, just difficulty
using it properly. I frequently miss 3rd gear when trying to shift fast.
(And I understand that the Forester isn't really a sports car, but if
they're going to sell the thing with a hot motor and a 5-speed, they ought
to at least make it a *decent* 5-speed.) I'm considering having the dealer
install a short-shift kit (if available) to see whether this will ameliorate
the spongy shifting. Furthermore, the ratio spacing is wierd -- the gears
are all way to close together and they're all to low. I only get about one
second of acceleration out of 1st gear before redline. And at 70 MPH in 5th
gear the tach shows almost 3500 RPM.

I noticed the tight gear spacing and low ratios on my various test drives,
but expected to get used to it. And I figured that Subaru wouldn't have
geared it that low unless the engine was intended to run at higher RPM's.
But I managed to avoid crunching 3rd gear until after I had actually
purchased my own. (Good for the dealer, I suppose, but not so much for me.)
I now have just over 6000 miles on it, and I'm still not completely used to
the funky gear ratios, resulting in occasional herky-jerky shifting --
though I seem to be getting there.

If I had it to do again, I'd fork over the extra bucks for an automatic,
just to save myself the frustration of trying to get used to this
transmission. And I'm not a novice with manuals. I've *always* preferred
manuals to autos when given a choice. Maybe I'm just getting old.

'Course I'm not so old as to not appreciate the turbo motor. I realize it's
not for everybody, but I wouldn't have even considered a non-turbo Forester.

But don't get the impression that I'm dissatisfied overall with the car just
because I'm having a hard time with the tranny. I still expect to keep this
car for a good long time. I'm just wishing that I hadn't made the
assumption that adjusting to the car's transmission gearing would be a snap.
Because it's turning out not to be.

- Greg Reed

 

[Helge Opgård]

I have my eye on a new Forester. I have a couple of questions.

If it doesn't raise my insurance too much, I would like the turbo model.
How often does the air filter under the hood scoop need to be replaced?
How much does the filter cost?

There is no air-filter under the hood scoop. The hood scoop is for the
intercooler which is an "air to air" radiator that cools down the intake
air to make it more dense. The air filter on a turbo model is placed
safely under the hood just like in a non-turbo version, do not think it
is more expensive or needs more frequent replacement than in a
non-turbo.

I would like some opinions on the automatic vs. the 5 speed transmision.

I have a 99 Forester Turbo (2 liter European model) with automatic, very
smooth shift. Have not tried one with manual, but is really happy with
the automatic. Have tried a 2 liter without turbo, it sucked

I plan on using the car as normal transportation and also plan on taking
it on 'seasonal use' and some rough dirt roads. No real off-roading.

Foresters are great for normal transportation, they handle like cars but
have less ground clearance than typicall off-road cars.

 

[Edward Hayes]

I have a 2000 Forest non turbo with the automatic and fine it's a great
daily driver and have plenty of go power. Comfortable on 500 mile trips at
75 mph and yielded 26-28 mpg at that speed. 72,000

 

[Woody]

I have my eye on a new Forester. I have a couple of questions.

If it doesn't raise my insurance too much, I would like the turbo model.
How often does the air filter under the hood scoop need to be replaced?
How much does the filter cost?

I would like some opinions on the automatic vs. the 5 speed transmision.

I plan on using the car as normal transportation and also plan on taking
it on 'seasonal use' and some rough dirt roads. No real off-roading.

The standard 2.5 liter engine with manual transmission makes for a
solid vehicle that will handle gravel roads and moderate snow just
fine. We just traded in a '98 Forester s with 120K on it for a new '04
Forester xs, both with 5 speed manual. The engine/transmission
combination provides adequate power and is fun to drive.

The manual transmission model center differential is a simpler design
fixed 50/50 power ratio viscous coupling that works just fine. The xs
also comes standard with limited slip rear differential so we will be
all set for wintahh. The auto trans center differential is a more
complex clutch based variable power ratio design.

My wife drove one of the auto trans Foresters and could not stand the
hunting between gears on our rolling hill terrain. (What the hell gear
is it in now)? It also seemed to her to have less power. Of course if
you are real lazy or have trouble counting to five, the by all means
go for the auto trans.

Woody; 95FXDS

 

[Ian Brown]

No problems at all with the cruise on my Forester. But I *have* been having
trouble with the transmission. Not mechanical problems, just difficulty
using it properly. I frequently miss 3rd gear when trying to shift fast.
(And I understand that the Forester isn't really a sports car, but if
they're going to sell the thing with a hot motor and a 5-speed, they ought
to at least make it a *decent* 5-speed.) I'm considering having the dealer
install a short-shift kit (if available) to see whether this will ameliorate
the spongy shifting.

Something like this...?

http://www.scoobymods.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2198


Ian
04 Forester XT Auto.

 

[P T]

(e-mail address removed) (Woody)

...Of course if you are real lazy or have
trouble counting to five, the by all means
go for the auto trans.

Automatic transmissions are also better for people who must do urban
commutes every day on congested urban freeways where they encounter
miles and miles of stop and go and stop and go and stop and go and stop
and go and stop and go and, well, I guess until you've done it, you
can't appreciate it.

 

[Lord Drool Rockworm]

My thoughts are: Good choice.

I did not raise my insurance all that much, (so little infact, I don't
even bother to take notice of it)

So Far, I've not had to replace the air filter, so I can't speak to
that. I did install a grill in the intake to keep the large stuff
out.

Automatics are rubbish, go with the manual.

I drive rough dirt roads and cross streams all the time, and I've no
complaints.

I've also installed the towing package, and it handles a tralier very
well.

Cheers,
Michael

 

[Woody]

No problems at all with the cruise on my Forester. But I *have* been having
trouble with the transmission. Not mechanical problems, just difficulty
using it properly. I frequently miss 3rd gear when trying to shift fast.
(And I understand that the Forester isn't really a sports car, but if
they're going to sell the thing with a hot motor and a 5-speed, they ought
to at least make it a *decent* 5-speed.) I'm considering having the dealer
install a short-shift kit (if available) to see whether this will ameliorate
the spongy shifting. Furthermore, the ratio spacing is wierd -- the gears
are all way to close together and they're all to low. I only get about one
second of acceleration out of 1st gear before redline. And at 70 MPH in 5th
gear the tach shows almost 3500 RPM.

I noticed the tight gear spacing and low ratios on my various test drives,
but expected to get used to it. And I figured that Subaru wouldn't have
geared it that low unless the engine was intended to run at higher RPM's.
But I managed to avoid crunching 3rd gear until after I had actually
purchased my own. (Good for the dealer, I suppose, but not so much for me.)
I now have just over 6000 miles on it, and I'm still not completely used to
the funky gear ratios, resulting in occasional herky-jerky shifting --
though I seem to be getting there.

Hmmmm
In over 120K on our '98 Forester and now 2K on the new '04, I don't
recall either my wife or I ever missing 3rd or any other gear. And I
tend to snap the shifts. Always nice and clean.

In fact, prior to reading the above, I made a run to the market with
the '04 and was enjoying how well it went through the gears. Of course
I would never own a slush box anything so I admit a bias.

The axel ratio on the Forester is lower than on my Ram truck but the
overall ratio is well matched to the engine. After all, you get good
acceleration, reasonable gas mileage and good reliability. I wish that
my Ram truck with the "Hemi" got all three or even remotely close to
it. While I don't have to stop at "every" gas station, I am doing my
part to keep the demand for gas high.


Woody; 95FXDS

 

[Ignignokt]

Ian Brown wrote:

Something like this...?

http://www.scoobymods.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2198


Ian
04 Forester XT Auto.

Yes. Exactly like that. (And a lot cheaper than I expected, too.) Thank
you!

- Greg Reed

 

[CompUser]

No problems at all with the cruise on my Forester. But I *have* been having
trouble with the transmission. Not mechanical problems, just difficulty
using it properly. I frequently miss 3rd gear when trying to shift fast.

The gearbox will loosen up somewhat with miles.
Try checking over at NASIOC for "synchromesh
fluid."

 

[Ignignokt]

The gearbox will loosen up somewhat with miles.
Try checking over at NASIOC for "synchromesh
fluid."

I've been doing my own asking around locally about "synchromesh fluid" since
first hearing about it in this forum. And the consensus seems to be that
it's completely unnecessary in a modern transmission. My mechanic's opinion
is that my intention to switch to synthetic gear oil is probably a lot
better idea. So that's what I plan to do. My Forester now has just a hair
over 6500 miles on the clock. When it reaches 7500 (probably in about 4 or
5 weeks, depending on how much riding my new -- er, old -- Honda sees),
*all* lubricants will be replaced with synthetics. At that time, he's also
going to install my new short-throw shift kit and new, tighter bushings.
Hopefully the combination of synthetic gear oil and tighter shifting will
help to aleviate my troubles. I'm still convinced that the problem is the
squishy-feeling shift lever. (I've become used to -- spoiled by? --
shifting my old Audi. And as well as Japanese cars are built, there's just
no beating a slick German-made transmission.)

But even with my frustrating shifting problems, it's still a helluva fun
car, rivaling competitors costing many thousands of $$ more. I can't wait
to play with it in the snow come this winter. (And yes, it'll have snow
tires.) I used to refer to my old Audi quattro as my "snow mobile" because
of its prowess in the white stuff. I expect my new Forester to be every bit
as capable, plus it has quite a bit more power than my tired, old Audi ever
did (167 bhp factory rating).

- Greg

 

[CompUser]

I've been doing my own asking around locally about "synchromesh fluid" since
first hearing about it in this forum. And the consensus seems to be that
it's completely unnecessary in a modern transmission. My mechanic's opinion
is that my intention to switch to synthetic gear oil is probably a lot
better idea. So that's what I plan to do.

Do come back and post how you like it!

But even with my frustrating shifting problems, it's still a helluva fun
car, rivaling competitors costing many thousands of $$ more.

Subaru's seem to give fantastic value/price
returns.

 

[Ignignokt]

Do come back and post how you like it!

Now that I've replaced the illegal (in Michigan) oscillating LED taillight
on my bike with a legal incandescant one, I'm back to commuting to and from
work on that instead of using the Forester -- as long as the weather's nice.
(I haven't bought a rain suit yet, so I avoid riding if rain looks likely.)
So it might take me longer than usual to accumulate the remaining miles
before my next service. I normally drive about 350 to 400 miles a week.
With all that going on the Forester, I'd be at 7500 in about 2 weeks. With
a (hopefully) good chunk of that mileage going on the bike, I'm going to
guess about 4 or 5 weeks. At the same service, I'm going to have my new
short-shift lever and tighter shift bushings installed, so while I'll be
happy to comment on the entire package (fluids and hardware), I don't know
that I'll really be able to say what improvement is due to the fluids and
what is due to the hardware.

BTW, I bought the hardware from Kastle's Korner, and I have to say that
these guys are great! Kevin answered all my questions very quickly and was
very nice to deal with. My order shipped the next day, and arrived two days
after that. (And I got their last Forester short-shifter -- Sorry!) They
even sent along a couple of free decals, to help make my car faster.

- Greg Reed

 

[CompUser]

At the same service, I'm going to have my new
short-shift lever and tighter shift bushings installed, so while I'll be
happy to comment on the entire package (fluids and hardware), I don't know
that I'll really be able to say what improvement is due to the fluids and
what is due to the hardware.

I've seen many comments on NASIOC reference
synthetic gearbox oil...seems about an even split
between "makes shifting easier" and "started off
easier, began grinding worse, back to dino gear
oil and all's well again". Another data point
won't hurt!

 

[Henry Paul]

I recently changed mine as well. Did a dino/dino change in my transmission
and now I have a really hard time getting to first and reverse at a
standstill. I am thinking of trying synthetic next time.

 

[CompUser]

I recently changed mine as well. Did a dino/dino change in my transmission
and now I have a really hard time getting to first and reverse at a
standstill. I am thinking of trying synthetic next time.

Well, like many boxes, reverse has no synchro.
Going into 1st or just about any other gear with
clutch in seems to help set up reverse.

One of the criticisms on synthetic in the gear
box, at the very least in theory, is synchros
don't like "slick", and synthetics slicker than
dino...like Ken G. says, "Lots of folks have
problems with synchros, who's ever heard of
anyone _wearing out_ the gears?"

 

[Henry Paul]

Well, I'm not against saying it is a coincidence, but the transmission
didn't do that until after I changed the oil.

 

[Henry Paul]

Well, I'm not against saying it is a coincidence, but the transmission
didn't do that until after I changed the oil.