MUCH more reliable than the Escape, I believe. But yes, lemons happen to
all manufacturers. (Or should I say, happen to some BUYERS of all
manufacturers.
Agreed, but I expect a lot more than the warrantee period - more like
150-200k miles. Along that line, I wouldn't consider a GM product at
any price - Way too expensive at any price when you consider the repair
expenses per mile, limited life span vs. cost and their historically
poor service/customer relations, etc. One can argue it's different now,
but I doubt it. Been burnt on too many GM products to be a sucker
again. Then there's the Chrysler transmissions that have been dogs for
10+ years....
Me too. I burned my bridges to American made auto products long ago. I
expect never to rebuild them. And I'm sorry, but that is a plus of the
Forester over the Outback, IMO. I've already experienced the drop in some
reliability of US-assembled Nissan products.
I have more confidence in Ford / Mazda, but that's my biggest concern
about the Escape/Tribute - is it going to require excessive repairs when
it hits 100-120k, is it going to rattle and creak at 50k and is it going
to need new tires and brakes every 25k miles as some have suggested.
Subaru seems to have a much better long-term, overall reliability -
perhaps right up their with Honda and Toyota.
I'll admit to being one of those with a rattle at 70K miles with one of
our two Foresters. But it is a rattle of minimal importance, the blasted
heat shields on the muffler. I probably am going to cut them off because
fixes seem to be short term in effectiveness, according to what I've read.
And the rattle is only at certain speeds and certain days. The rattles and
creaks I expect from a Ford/Mazda product (base on observation of some of my
in-laws' vehicles) might fall into similar category of small stuff.
I really thought when we bought these Foresters (our first ever Subarus)
that Subarus would rattle more with little things inside etc. That has not
proven true at all. Other than the aforementioned heat shield rattle on
mine, our two 99 models are as quiet and sound inside and out as when we got
them. I'm pleasantly surprised at that. One is nearing 80K and the other is
beyond 71K miles. Neither burns a drop of oil as yet; they still have
excellent power, great driveability and handling; paint is holding up
wonderfully in spite of my neglectful lack of care the last couple years.
Specs indicate the Forester has 63 ft3 behind the front seats vs. 69 ft3
for the Escape, but the Escape stands 2-4 inches higher, so the question
becomes a matter of area vs. volume since height in the cargo area is
generally unusable. The Escape is about 2 inches wider, but for 2 or 4
people, that shouldn't be much of a concern. The Escape does, however,
have a bit more overall leg room which could be a significant advantage
for anyone riding in the back.
Rear legroom in the Forester IS a limitation if you will use that very
often. The seats are pretty hard too, but we use that so little, it is a non
factor for us. As to the volume issue, the usefulness of height in the cargo
area pretty much depends on what you haul. I have always said that the space
inside the Forester compared to the Outback is extremely close in total
available space, but it is arranged differently. The Outback is wider and
lower in the cargo area, while the Forester has a higher roof height inside.
This is quite helpful to me on the occasions I want to stand my bikes up
inside the Forester for long trips if weather is too bad. I can use a
fork-mount clamp mounted on a board laid across the lowered back seats and
mount my bikes upright, only removing or dropping the seatposts (and of
course with front wheel removed for fork mount.) This could never work in
the Outback with its lower roof height. I also feel like its more spacious
because of that roof height (and I'm not tall, at 5' 9".) You have to look
at what works for you, obviously.
It also becomes a question of 10-20%
better gas mileage (a good $1-2k over the life of the vehicle) for
perhaps 5-10% less space.
I keep going in circles - the Escape does have some advantage on space,
but reliability (long term cost and aggravation) could be a major
drawback. On the plus side, most articles seem to suggest the
Escape/Tribute may be much better than a typical Ford reliability.
Then again, the Forester's interior seems to be more refined. Back and
forth - back and forth......
(See my notes above!)
By FAR. The handling of the Forester is nothing short of amazing, in my
opinion. It holds the road under difficult driving conditions almost like a
sports car, better than in some ways. The other big issue is ride profile of
the vehicle. The lower height of the Forester is a HUGE advantage in windy
conditions. After yesterday's terrible winds on the East Coast (USA), I sure
was glad it was the Forester I was driving up I-81 in VA. I certainly FELT
the wind but the Forester held the line much better than an Escape or any
other higher profile SUV would ever manage. I personally hold the lower ride
height of the Forester as a significant advantage over ALL SUVs. Of course,
it still must meet one's needs in other ways (and it does for us.)
Back to the Forester, as I don't see any need for off-road performance.
In fact, if I get the Escape/tribute, I may go with the 2WD and save the
$1200 plus another $1-2K in gas..
I don't know where you live, but regardless of whether you deal with
snow or not, AWD is a _major_ advantage to have, and Subarus system is
superb and time-proven. Having owned these Foresters for over 4 years on one
and almost 5 years on the other, I have a hard time thinking about going
back to any 2WD vehicle. The Forester's handling in rainy conditions is
incredible, let alone snow conditions, where it does very well. I do wish we
had the limited slip rear differential for its wintertime assistance, but am
still very happy with these cars as they are. Next ones will have this for
sure.
Excellent thoughts. Thanks to you and all the others who have
responded. Then again, I just read that the 2005 Escape will start
production early in January where they reportedly will be improving the
sound deadening plus they will be moving the shift from the column to
the floor. Reportedly, they have stopped taking special orders for the
2004 model and they will have a Mercury model - the Mariner - to add to
the choice. Now if only they can find space for a larger gas tank......
You're still on the fence, I see. For your sake, I hope you think hard
about Subarus. Unless the body design/space layout issues cannot work for
you, I think you'll be much happier with them than with a Ford, but that's
my biased opinion, and of course I have no reason to care which you choose
other than that I like to see folks happy!! Best wishes with whatever and
whenever you buy.
