Forester: Why get a turbo? What about the back seat?

[Henry Paul]

I had an '85 Jeep Grand Wagoneer that had a spoiler just for that reason. I
didn't realize what it was for until I took it off to do some painting work
and the rear window got really dirty.

 

[Andrew Webber]

Something to think about. Some vehicles use that rear
spoiler to smooth out the airflow behind the car. This
often results in less dirt "clinging" to the rear window
and hatch. I know of several wagons/SUVs that were much
dirtier without a spoiler than ones driven in the same
areas with one. Whether or not it applies to the Forester,
I don't know. But it is something you can use to justify
it in your head at least.

Well I guess if it's _functional_...

Thanks!
=aw


andrew [(e-mail address removed)]

 

[Andrew Webber]

I had an '85 Jeep Grand Wagoneer that had a spoiler just for that reason. I
didn't realize what it was for until I took it off to do some painting work
and the rear window got really dirty.

Well I guess it _is_ functional.

Thanks for that too.

=aw


andrew [(e-mail address removed)]

 

[David]

Well I guess it _is_ functional.

They offer two for the Forester. A thin downward-curving thing that keeps
the rear window clean, and the wing, that seems to be mostly for style,
and apparently keeps the window slightly cleaner than nothing. I make
do with nothing...

 

[Andrew Webber]

They offer two for the Forester. A thin downward-curving thing that keeps
the rear window clean, and the wing, that seems to be mostly for style,
and apparently keeps the window slightly cleaner than nothing. I make
do with nothing...

I'll have to look closely at what exactly comes with the XT but
_something_ is standard on XT and optional on XS.

If I test drive both XS and XT, what's the recommended order? I'm
guessing the XS first to get a sense of how much better the XT is, and
not the XT first which might make the XS feel slow.

Thanks!
=aw

andrew [(e-mail address removed)]

 

[David]

On Sat, 25 Sep 2004 08:45:55 -0700, "David"
If I test drive both XS and XT, what's the recommended order?

For me: XS only. I wanted to make a practical choice. Might not have
been able to otherwise. Anyway, I bought mine slightly used. XTs were
rare on the used market late last year.

 

[Andrew Webber]

For me: XS only. I wanted to make a practical choice. Might not have
been able to otherwise. Anyway, I bought mine slightly used. XTs were
rare on the used market late last year.

By "practical choice", you mean you might have bought the turbo just
because it's fun? I keep wavering, the difference in cost is about
C$3800 on list prices and about C$500 a year for premium gas and more
of it. Easy to lose sight of that when you're driving the vehicle and
having fun.


andrew [(e-mail address removed)]

 

[Edward Hayes]

I keep about 80 dollars in my billfold and use the rear washer/wiper.

 

[David]

By "practical choice", you mean you might have bought the turbo just
because it's fun?

Pretty much. XS is less expensive, plus I could get it used, but the XT
would have been new. That plus the fuel economy & fuel price. Don't recall
if I checked for insurance cost as well.

The other major issue for me was I wanted 5-speed with sunroof (the
sunroof was one of the major attractions of the Forester). In late 2003,
that combination wasn't available in the US in an XT. I think they had
'em in Canada though.

Anyway, I have no complaints about the passing power of my XS.

 

[Andrew Webber]

Pretty much. XS is less expensive, plus I could get it used, but the XT
would have been new. That plus the fuel economy & fuel price. Don't recall
if I checked for insurance cost as well.

The other major issue for me was I wanted 5-speed with sunroof (the
sunroof was one of the major attractions of the Forester). In late 2003,
that combination wasn't available in the US in an XT. I think they had
'em in Canada though.

Anyway, I have no complaints about the passing power of my XS.

Thanks for your experience. That's a useful data point.



andrew [(e-mail address removed)]

 

[Rat]

They offer two for the Forester. A thin downward-curving thing that keeps
the rear window clean, and the wing, that seems to be mostly for style,
and apparently keeps the window slightly cleaner than nothing. I make
do with nothing...

We went off roading through some very dusty gravel roads with the subaru
forester owners club today. The xt with the rear wing stayed very clean
on the back window and hatch while ours and the others with no wing were
covered in dust. We proved that the wing is fully functional.

 

[Andrew Webber]

We went off roading through some very dusty gravel roads with the subaru
forester owners club today. The xt with the rear wing stayed very clean
on the back window and hatch while ours and the others with no wing were
covered in dust. We proved that the wing is fully functional.

Another useful fact, thanks! I know there's a rear wiper, but keeping
dirt/dust off the window is better than cleaning it off!

=aw

andrew [(e-mail address removed)]

 

[Cam Penner]

Another useful fact, thanks! I know there's a rear wiper, but keeping
dirt/dust off the window is better than cleaning it off!

It's not just the window. It's the whole rear of the
vehicle. It keeps your clothes cleaner too.

(plus, you know you WANT the turbo. Are you positive you
read the fuel economy numbers right? The WRX has
(allegedly) better milage than the RS, but uses premium
gas.)

 

[Ignignokt]

I'll have to look closely at what exactly comes with the XT but
_something_ is standard on XT and optional on XS.

If I test drive both XS and XT, what's the recommended order? I'm
guessing the XS first to get a sense of how much better the XT is, and
not the XT first which might make the XS feel slow.

My Forester XT has no wing / spoiler of any sort on the back. That's one of
the things I like about the Forester XT: Aside from the hood scoop and 16"
wheels, it's indistinguishable from a base Forester X. Only those who keep
up with Subaru's model line-up will know the beast that lives within.

- Greg Reed

 

[Ignignokt]

David:

Andrew:
By "practical choice", you mean you might have bought the turbo just
because it's fun? I keep wavering, the difference in cost is about
C$3800 on list prices and about C$500 a year for premium gas and more
of it. Easy to lose sight of that when you're driving the vehicle and
having fun.

My advice, Andrew, is that if you're even *considering* the non-Turbo
Forester, you're probably better off getting it instead of the Turbo. Those
of us for whom the XT is made don't even have to think about it -- we
wouldn't even consider the non-turbo Forester, when given the choice. (The
only real decision for me was between the Forester XT and the Impreza STi.)

Your concerns about the continuing costs of owning the XT tell me that
you're likely going to second guess yourself at each fill-up and with every
insurance bill. As for me, I've never had so much as a twinge of buyer's
remorse over my decision to go with the turbo. (Over my decision to forego
the auto perhaps, but never over getting the turbo.)

Just my two US cents' worth. Which is -- what? -- a nickel, Canadian?

- Greg Reed

 

[Ignignokt]

Anyway, I have no complaints about the passing power of my XS.

Whereas I consider the passing power of my XT to be barely adequate, and
would *love* another 80 or 100 hp. It's all a matter of personal taste and
perspective.

- Greg Reed

 

[FNO]

"Cam Penner"

It's not just the window. It's the whole rear of the
vehicle. It keeps your clothes cleaner too.

(plus, you know you WANT the turbo. Are you positive you
read the fuel economy numbers right? The WRX has
(allegedly) better milage than the RS, but uses premium
gas.)

Yes, but there is a displacement issue as well. The WRX is a 2.0L Turbo
while the RS is 2.5 NA. Though the turbo will give you crappier gas
mileage, it is somewhat offset by the smaller displacement. The Forrester
XS and XT both use 2.5L; on turbo and one NA. I also have a 2.5 turbo and
as long as you aren't playing with it, it get reasonable gas mileage, but
does have to use premium. But the 2.5 NA do get considerably better mileage
than I do.

 

[Andrew Webber]

David:


My advice, Andrew, is that if you're even *considering* the non-Turbo
Forester, you're probably better off getting it instead of the Turbo. Those
of us for whom the XT is made don't even have to think about it -- we
wouldn't even consider the non-turbo Forester, when given the choice. (The
only real decision for me was between the Forester XT and the Impreza STi.)

Your concerns about the continuing costs of owning the XT tell me that
you're likely going to second guess yourself at each fill-up and with every
insurance bill. As for me, I've never had so much as a twinge of buyer's
remorse over my decision to go with the turbo. (Over my decision to forego
the auto perhaps, but never over getting the turbo.)

Yeah.

And since my Explorer only has 155hp, everything I try seems better.


Thanks!


andrew [(e-mail address removed)]

 

[Andrew Webber]

(plus, you know you WANT the turbo. Are you positive you
read the fuel economy numbers right? The WRX has
(allegedly) better milage than the RS, but uses premium
gas.)

I know I want it. But I don't know if I think I need it. And it
will bother me to consume more fuel. If the mileage were the same but
just more expensive gas, the equation would be different again.

L/100km in city/highway

XS: 10.4/7.6
XT: 11.7/9.3

(lower numbers are better)


andrew [(e-mail address removed)]

 

[Andrew Webber]

My Forester XT has no wing / spoiler of any sort on the back. That's one of
the things I like about the Forester XT: Aside from the hood scoop and 16"
wheels, it's indistinguishable from a base Forester X. Only those who keep
up with Subaru's model line-up will know the beast that lives within.

Yeah I like the idea of stealth power.

FWIW, for 2005, for Canada, "roof-line spoiler" is standard on XT,
optional on XS and X.


andrew [(e-mail address removed)]