chains for Forester

[Bill Sharpe]

I just bought a new 2004 Forester. One of the papers I signed is a tire
chain disclosure that states in big black capital letters: "As equipped,
this vehicle may not be operated with tire chains but may accommodate
some other type of tire traction device. See the owner's manual for
details."

The owner's manual says you can put chains on the front wheels but limit
driving speed to 20 mph maximum.

I've heard that Subaru's really don't need chains except possibly in
weather where you would not want to drive anyway, but does the
California Highway Department go along with that approach at chain
control stations?

My daughter will be taking the car on ski trips this winter. Any
comments/suggestions would be appreciated?

Bill

 

[Bobby]

Never needed chains up here in Anchorage. I've just stuck with the
origional factory tires. Get far better traction then in my 89 Bronco 4X4
with studded tires

--

| I just bought a new 2004 Forester. One of the papers I signed is a tire
| chain disclosure that states in big black capital letters: "As equipped,
| this vehicle may not be operated with tire chains but may accommodate
| some other type of tire traction device. See the owner's manual for
| details."
|
| The owner's manual says you can put chains on the front wheels but limit
| driving speed to 20 mph maximum.
|
| I've heard that Subaru's really don't need chains except possibly in
| weather where you would not want to drive anyway, but does the
| California Highway Department go along with that approach at chain
| control stations?
|
| My daughter will be taking the car on ski trips this winter. Any
| comments/suggestions would be appreciated?
|
| Bill
|
|

 

[S]

Hi Bill, All!

I just bought a new 2004 Forester. One of the papers I signed is a tire
chain disclosure that states in big black capital letters: "As equipped,
this vehicle may not be operated with tire chains but may accommodate
some other type of tire traction device. See the owner's manual for
details."

Can't imagine why not; plenty of clearance in the wheel wells. We
carry 2 sets of cable chains in the back of m'ladys '02 Forester, but
have never needed them.

The owner's manual says you can put chains on the front wheels but limit
driving speed to 20 mph maximum.

Now that's decidedly odd. Conventional wisdom suggests that if you
must chain up, you do both axles, or only the rears. Way too much
danger of "pin-wheel" action otherwise. Of course at <20MPH, this
probably isn't too much of an issue. I have an old GL 4X4 wagon that
routinely wears real chains on all fours in the winter. It takes a
_lot_ of snow to stop this combo, and then it's usually more a lack of
power than a lack of traction.

I've heard that Subaru's really don't need chains except possibly in
weather where you would not want to drive anyway, but does the
California Highway Department go along with that approach at chain
control stations?

Who can say. I _can_ tell you that if you put a set of Michelin Arctic
Alpins on for winter driving, it is unlikely that you will ever _need_
the chains, whether required by the state or not.

My daughter will be taking the car on ski trips this winter. Any
comments/suggestions would be appreciated?

As mentioned, use a dedicated winter tire. The all seasons supplied on
our '02 were less than confidence inspiring on slick roads.
Also, on the '02, the ABS system sucks on very low traction surfaces
(very hard packed snow to black ice), and we have found it beneficial
to disable the ABS in these situations. Either pull the fuse, or
install a switch. Maybe the ABS is better in the newer models . . .
Whatever you do, consider that a practiced driver on bald tires is
probably safer than an unskilled driver on fresh studs. (Chains do
even the field a bit, but are very tiring, both to install and remove,
and to drive on for any distance.) Find a big snow covered parking
lot, and have her practice sliding around until the ol' countersteer
becomes second nature; if her first experience in slip-slidin' is on a
snowy mountain highway, it's _way_ too late . . . Or better yet, find
a club sponsoring an ice rally-cross event, and spend a Sunday dodging
cones. (This is how I've trained my teenaged drivers, and it's huge
fun, too

Hope this is helpful.

ByeBye! S.


Steve Jernigan KG0MB
Laboratory Manager
Microelectronics Research
University of Colorado
(719) 262-3101

 

[Rockin Ronnie]

Hi Bill, All!




Can't imagine why not; plenty of clearance in the wheel wells. We
carry 2 sets of cable chains in the back of m'ladys '02 Forester, but
have never needed them.

........and some more good content but it takes up too much space.......

Solution: use dedicated snow tires and steel rims in the winter. In
Canada Motomaster Icetracs will do the trick from a price/performance
standpoint.

Ron

 

[Woody]

I just bought a new 2004 Forester. One of the papers I signed is a tire
chain disclosure that states in big black capital letters: "As equipped,
this vehicle may not be operated with tire chains but may accommodate
some other type of tire traction device. See the owner's manual for
details."

The owner's manual says you can put chains on the front wheels but limit
driving speed to 20 mph maximum.

I've heard that Subaru's really don't need chains except possibly in
weather where you would not want to drive anyway, but does the
California Highway Department go along with that approach at chain
control stations?

My daughter will be taking the car on ski trips this winter. Any
comments/suggestions would be appreciated?

Bill

We just traded our 1998 Forester S (120K miles NH driving) for a 2004
Forester XS ($550 under invoice plus $1000 cash rebate, good deal).

I also noticed that the 2004 manual says to put chains only on the
front wheels, contrary to my instincts as S has already noted. When I
put chains on my 4X4 truck to plow, I either put them on just the rear
or on all 4 wheels. I suppose that Subaru has some good reason for the
advice.

Our '98 did real well on the roads in the snow without ever using
chains once we replaced the original Croak-ohama tires. The tires on
the '04 are also Croak-ohama's but a new model. Remains to be seen how
they do in the snow. Our 12 % slope long driveway is another matter.
If more than about 4 inches of snow, the '98 Forrester had a hard time
getting up the grade while my 4X4 Ram truck with BFG All Terrain A/T
tires had no problem. (Too bad that BFG does not make those tires for
the Forrester). The '04 Forrester has limited slip rear differential
and hopefully that will help up the driveway.

Ski trips on roads that get plowed periodically during a storm should
be no problem for the Forrester itself. The remaining parameter will
be driver skill, experience and judgment. Driving in the snow will be
a problem for an inexperienced driver no matter what the vehicle. If
no experience at all, expect to end up in the ditch if driving during
moderate to heavy snowfall with a few inches snow on the road on
winding hilly roads. Every year the first snowfall here results in a
fresh batch of vehicles in the ditch, many of them big SUV's.

The only real downside of the Forrester in winter is the ABS breaks.
They will reduce control and increase stopping distance on snow/ice as
compared to non ABS with an experienced driver. Of course, you should
not go fast in the snow anyway. Most drivers of 4WD vehicles drive too
fast in snow not really getting the fact that the vehicle will take
just as long to stop as a 2WD.

Woody

 

[Bill Sharpe]

Thanks for all the comments. Snow tires seem like overkill (I'm in sunny
Southern California). I remember a couple of winters long ago near Erie,
Pennsylvania. We bought two extra rims and put studded snow tires on
them and changed off the tires every autumn -- yes, snow would arrive by
Halloween. I remember taking a trip to Florida one Christmas. I took off
the snow tires and put on the regular tires with chains just to get out
of town. Removed them after 25 miles and continued the trip. Studded
tires weren't allowed in Georgia.

Bill

Hi Bill, All!

I just bought a new 2004 Forester. One of the papers I signed is a tire
chain disclosure that states in big black capital letters: "As equipped,
this vehicle may not be operated with tire chains but may accommodate
some other type of tire traction device. See the owner's manual for
details."

Can't imagine why not; plenty of clearance in the wheel wells. We
carry 2 sets of cable chains in the back of m'ladys '02 Forester, but
have never needed them.

The owner's manual says you can put chains on the front wheels but limit
driving speed to 20 mph maximum.

Now that's decidedly odd. Conventional wisdom suggests that if you
must chain up, you do both axles, or only the rears. Way too much
danger of "pin-wheel" action otherwise. Of course at <20MPH, this
probably isn't too much of an issue. I have an old GL 4X4 wagon that
routinely wears real chains on all fours in the winter. It takes a
_lot_ of snow to stop this combo, and then it's usually more a lack of
power than a lack of traction.

I've heard that Subaru's really don't need chains except possibly in
weather where you would not want to drive anyway, but does the
California Highway Department go along with that approach at chain
control stations?

Who can say. I _can_ tell you that if you put a set of Michelin Arctic
Alpins on for winter driving, it is unlikely that you will ever _need_
the chains, whether required by the state or not.

My daughter will be taking the car on ski trips this winter. Any
comments/suggestions would be appreciated?

As mentioned, use a dedicated winter tire. The all seasons supplied on
our '02 were less than confidence inspiring on slick roads.
Also, on the '02, the ABS system sucks on very low traction surfaces
(very hard packed snow to black ice), and we have found it beneficial
to disable the ABS in these situations. Either pull the fuse, or
install a switch. Maybe the ABS is better in the newer models . . .
Whatever you do, consider that a practiced driver on bald tires is
probably safer than an unskilled driver on fresh studs. (Chains do
even the field a bit, but are very tiring, both to install and remove,
and to drive on for any distance.) Find a big snow covered parking
lot, and have her practice sliding around until the ol' countersteer
becomes second nature; if her first experience in slip-slidin' is on a
snowy mountain highway, it's _way_ too late . . . Or better yet, find
a club sponsoring an ice rally-cross event, and spend a Sunday dodging
cones. (This is how I've trained my teenaged drivers, and it's huge
fun, too

Hope this is helpful.

ByeBye! S.


Steve Jernigan KG0MB
Laboratory Manager
Microelectronics Research
University of Colorado
(719) 262-3101

 

[Juhan Leemet]

Thanks for all the comments. Snow tires seem like overkill (I'm in sunny
Southern California). I remember a couple of winters long ago near Erie,
Pennsylvania. We bought two extra rims and put studded snow tires...

For AWD, wouldn't you want the same tires all 'round? I've got a set of 4
studded tires on a 2nd set of rims here in St. John's, NF, Canada.

 

[Guest]

For AWD, wouldn't you want the same tires all 'round? I've got a set of 4
studded tires on a 2nd set of rims here in St. John's, NF, Canada.

In northern Idaho or New Mexico I've never used chains! Used to commute
from Santa Fe to Los Alamos (75 miles) for 12 years and never used studs
or chains. And there's lots of of black ice and snow!!! That "never"
applies to any car I've ever used, be it a Porsche, or front 2wd cars.
I don't like the Sube, can't have near as much fun, it won't break loose
except on black ice!
Username munged by FixNews

 

[BBB]

It would still be nice to find out if anybody has experience with
chains. When I lived in Washington state many years ago, the law
required you to have them in your car when driving over the mountain
passes in winter, and it had heavy penalties for those who got stuck
there and didn't have chains.

 

[Xtranet]

I just bought a new 2004 Forester. One of the papers I signed is a tire
chain disclosure that states in big black capital letters: "As equipped,
this vehicle may not be operated with tire chains but may accommodate
some other type of tire traction device. See the owner's manual for
details."

The owner's manual says you can put chains on the front wheels but limit
driving speed to 20 mph maximum.

I've heard that Subaru's really don't need chains except possibly in
weather where you would not want to drive anyway, but does the
California Highway Department go along with that approach at chain
control stations?

My daughter will be taking the car on ski trips this winter. Any
comments/suggestions would be appreciated?

The word chains can be a misnomer. Probably why it's written that you
should not use them, because it can be misconstrued to be link type chains.

You MUST use the "cable type" chains and ONLY in the front because of
clearance issues on the inner wall of the rear tire to the strut spring
bucket. Trying reaching in between there and you'll see that there's only
about 1/2 inch clearance. There's more clearance in the front.

Even if you install the cable chains to the rear tightly, there's enough
slop in the chain that you rear strut spring bucket will start to wear off.
Maybe then you'll have enough clearance?

I live in Northern California and go to Tahoe on occasions. The checkpoints
will know that you have an AWD or 4WD vehicle, check your tires, and sometimes
even ask if you have 4WD engaged. They usually wave us by.

We were in Salt Lake City this past winter when they took a major snow dump.
I would have to say that the Forester (X) performed flawlessly even with its
stock Geolanders. The tires have a lot of siping so I'm satisfied with them
as all seasons. Also we didn't drive excessively fast especially in these
conditions. We never once had to use chains the entire trip in snow country.

 

[John O]

I live in Northern California and go to Tahoe on occasions. The
checkpoints

will know that you have an AWD or 4WD vehicle, check your tires, and sometimes
even ask if you have 4WD engaged. They usually wave us by.

Didn't I see that scene in a TV commercial? If not, it ought to be in one.

-John O

 

[Chris Phillipo]

It would still be nice to find out if anybody has experience with
chains. When I lived in Washington state many years ago, the law
required you to have them in your car when driving over the mountain
passes in winter, and it had heavy penalties for those who got stuck
there and didn't have chains.

Have you considered cables? These are lighter and less destructive.

 

[Guest]

Didn't I see that scene in a TV commercial? If not, it ought to be in one.

-John O

Wasn't there a commercial some years back that Subaru was the Official
ski team vehicle? Now everyone is in love with Lance and bikes. :-]
Username munged by FixNews