What are the good years? What is usually broken? Why do people usually sell them? Major service intervals? I'm aware of the Sti swap options but what is involved? How hard is it to find a manual?
I'm looking for a tow-capable outdoor activity friendly fun to drive car and I think the forester fits this roll perfectly.
My Mother-in-Law has had two, both bought new. The first was a ~2000, manual, and it was traded in when the original clutch started to go (~130K miles?) for the ~2010 she has now (auto, the last of the "old" Foresters). Neither got anywhere near the published EPA economy numbers, even with other people driving, though the stick was a lot better than the auto (both are low-spec N/A models btw). They are surprisingly roomy for stuff, but the back seat is cramped. Neither has ever had any major (or really, even minor) issues. Maintain them by the owner's manual and they last. Never towed with either. Both have been very easy to work on for routine stuff (brakes, oil changes).
Honestly, having test-driven quite a few, I would look for the 2.5XT (that would be the turbo version), and then leave it stock. It struck that perfect balance of being able to have some fun yet still retained it's soft-roader/camping buddy character. I couldn't stand the acceleration of the non-turbos (glacial is a good adjective). There is a local STi-swapped one, and it's wicked cool, but it's also lowered and de-racked, etc.
The turbo manual version would definitely be what I'm after. The earlier cars when they were smaller and less SUV-ish. How interesting are they to drive? Does the car feel strange when the torque bias switches from front to rear like the R32 or is it a nice linear change? Are basic boost increases a problem or does it handle it in stride?
Sounds like your Mother-in-Law has been quite happy with them! Ever autocross them? Issues with sticky tires and rolling over?
Have you poked around on subaruforester.org? In the suspension section they have a few stickys that have a ton of good info. What does and doesn't swap from the imprezza is what will decide how much fun you can have with it. I was actively hunting for an early one until my wife mentioned that it was on the list of banned cars for our house. Dammit.
mr2peak wrote: The turbo manual version would definitely be what I'm after. The earlier cars when they were smaller and less SUV-ish. How interesting are they to drive? Does the car feel strange when the torque bias switches from front to rear like the R32 or is it a nice linear change? Are basic boost increases a problem or does it handle it in stride?
I could be misunderstanding your question, but at least with my WRX, the bias was set at 50:50.
Osterkraut wrote:mr2peak wrote: The turbo manual version would definitely be what I'm after. The earlier cars when they were smaller and less SUV-ish. How interesting are they to drive? Does the car feel strange when the torque bias switches from front to rear like the R32 or is it a nice linear change? Are basic boost increases a problem or does it handle it in stride?I could be misunderstanding your question, but at least with my WRX, the bias was set at 50:50.
Manuals are fixed 50:50
Autos can bias as far as 90:10 due to the fact that the centre diff is computer controlled.
mr2peak wrote: Sounds like your Mother-in-Law has been quite happy with them! Ever autocross them? Issues with sticky tires and rolling over?
Honestly, the 2.5XT Forester's I drove all felt like tall WRX wagons. I know that doesn't help much. Torque-split is locked at 50/50 IIRC, so there's no back/forth zaniness. The seats are mounted higher up than an Impreza, which adds to the SUV-like feel.
As for MIL's, yes, she loves the original Forester. She hated the new one (2011 I think?) and made it a point to buy the outgoing model (which was essentially the same thing from the beginning). I have not had a chance to autocross either one of them, but I did take both of them soft-roading, which they were both quite acceptable at.
mr2peak wrote: What are the good years? What is usually broken? Why do people usually sell them? Major service intervals? I'm aware of the Sti swap options but what is involved? How hard is it to find a manual? I'm looking for a tow-capable outdoor activity friendly fun to drive car and I think the forester fits this roll perfectly.
Traditionally most people will recommend avoiding the DOHC years (97-99) although in the Forester some 99's had the SOHC motor.
My mom's 2004 Legacy is on its 3rd engine and I have heard from a number of sources that Subaru sources a very short piston skirt design for the 2004 2.5L NA engines in an effort to improve fuel economy. This resulted in piston slap (a common problem in Subaru's) being even worse. Personally, I would avoid 2004's.
I hate Subaru Autoboxes - they just seem to drain all the fun out!
NGTD wrote:Osterkraut wrote:Manuals are fixed 50:50 Autos can bias as far as 90:10 due to the fact that the centre diff is computer controlled.mr2peak wrote: The turbo manual version would definitely be what I'm after. The earlier cars when they were smaller and less SUV-ish. How interesting are they to drive? Does the car feel strange when the torque bias switches from front to rear like the R32 or is it a nice linear change? Are basic boost increases a problem or does it handle it in stride?I could be misunderstanding your question, but at least with my WRX, the bias was set at 50:50.
Ah yes, I remember that now. Apparently you can add a switch that locks the center diff in older Subies for "true" 4x4.
NGTD wrote: My mom's 2004 Legacy is on its 3rd engine and I have heard from a number of sources that Subaru sources a very short piston skirt design for the 2004 2.5L NA engines in an effort to improve fuel economy. This resulted in piston slap (a common problem in Subaru's) being even worse. Personally, I would avoid 2004's. I hate Subaru Autoboxes - they just seem to drain all the fun out!
Funny you mention that. We bought my wife's '04 FozXS in '09 with 23k, and it has the worst piston slap I've ever heard from an otherwise strong Subaru engine. At an undermaintained 76k now, hasn't gotten worse... yet. Clatters like an OM617 Mercedes with dirty injectors when cold. And I love darn near everything about the car other than the auto box(still a huge improvement over earlier 4EATs, however).
For the OP:
'98-99: Impreza-based chassis. DOHC engine is a strong runner, but most were plagued by OE headgaskets. If fixed properly with the updated gaskets, they're fine. Drives like a '98 Impreza RS with tall tires because it is one, just with a dorkier body. Clutch chatter from an under-engineered pressure plate, put an Exedy Organic in it and it's fine. Rear wheel bearing issues unless repaired with the updated parts. S model buys you rear discs, rear LSD, 16" alloys, and a gigantic mammoth of a sunroof. '02-07 WRX suspension is a bolt in(less the front sway bar). WRX wagon struts and springs fit better than sedan. '98 Impreza RS/'97-99 Legacy GT power adders bolt straight in.
'00-01: Same chassis. SOHC engine. Lower torque curve than DOHC. Better OE headgaskets, but not great. Once again, solved by updated parts. Same for clutch and rear wheel bearings. Drives like a '00-01 Impreza RS with tall tires because it is one, dorky body yadda etc. Wife and I each owned an '01 L and loved them. Much more dynamic than you'd expect. Same WRX parts potential, '00-01 Impreza RS power adders bolt straight in.
'03-05: New Impreza-based chassis. Little better SOHC engine for '04, better headgaskets, better rear wheel bearings, bigger brakes('02 WRX spec), not sure how the clutch was. Much more refined feeling than the earlier cars. Still a good performer, just not as raw feeling, and the rear suspension bushings are too soft for my liking. E-throttle in '05. Auto box tuned better than -'01. '05 and newer nonturbo ECUs can be hacked via OpenSource. The reign of the XT turbo starts in this generation. The FozXT drives like a softcore '04 STI because it is one(less brakes, softer suspension, smaller intercooler and turbo, five speed instead of six, slower steering rack, etc). Rule of thumb: if it's mechanical bits that came OE on an '04 STI, it will bolt on to a Forester XT. Less useful trunk than the '98-01 cars.
'06-08: Same chassis. Couldn't tell you much about these, haven't owned one yet. Appears to be the same spec basically unchanged from '05 with an uglier body. I wouldn't kick one out of bed.
'09-present: New Legacy based chassis and the new RB25 2.5 NA engine started in here somewhere. Not terrible to look at, but much larger in every way than predecessors. New NA engine is a dog with slushbox compared to our '04, and turbos are auto ONLY in the US. My mother leased a new '11 NA/auto, and I hate it. Good little car unless you want to use more than 30% throttle or have owned an earlier iteration. The soul is gone.
Manuals aren't hard to find, particularly in earlier cars. 50:50 F/R torque bias in manuals, 70:30 default on autos(50:50 locked in manual 1st and 2nd, left up to the TCM in manual 3rd and drive). '03-'05 XT manual with the enormous sunroof is the sweet spot. Buy one if you can find one, you'll never find a better car for a small family to roadtrip through the mountains in.
We're looking to replace our '02 (anyone interested in one with WRX suspension, Stromung exhaust and a perpetual P0420 code?). The turbo simply doesn't make the grade for us for one reason only: premium fuel required. Foresters are geared lower than Imprezas and the gas mileage will never impress you (low to mid 20s). I wouldn't plan on towing anything other than maybe a jet ski on a trailer. Head gaskets go up to '02 (did ours) and is intermittent after that. It's fun on the WRX suspension with 17's but the ride isn't pleasant and we're frankly tired of it. We'll either get another and leave it stock, get a stick shift Jeep Patriot or look at whatever else is out there in dog-hauling, wagoney vehicles that aren't actually SUVs.
pre 11 xt would be my ideal, specifically the first body style xt. I love those things
a man trans makes a huge difference in grin factor in these
I say pre 11 because the new 2.5 seems like it's built for mileage and not stoutness, like the older ones.
it's a subaru so look out for head gaskets and consumables like wheel bearings and cv;s
they are damn good cars, I would have traded my kia in in a heartbeat when I worked at subie for a used xt
I have a Fozzie. It's a 07 Fozzie Sport XT. The sport model actually made it look good in my opinion. It's basically the front from a Fozzie STI with cloth interior. For my needs it's perfect. It's been ultra reliable and great to give more room without having a big car. (the other 3 cars are miata, mr2, and the mrs volvo c30)
The later 2nd gens auto do have the 45:55 torque split on the AWD. I know my rear tires will always break loose first.
If you think tall WRX then you are thinking right. It's not a luxury vehicle by any stretch and can be kind of load on the highway.
Overall, I'm glad I got mine and have gotten 2 years of solid service so far.
ValuePack wrote: '98-99: Impreza-based chassis. DOHC engine is a strong runner, but most were plagued by OE headgaskets. If fixed properly with the updated gaskets, they're fine. Drives like a '98 Impreza RS with tall tires because it *is* one, just with a dorkier body. Clutch chatter from an under-engineered pressure plate, put an Exedy Organic in it and it's fine. Rear wheel bearing issues unless repaired with the updated parts. S model buys you rear discs, rear LSD, 16" alloys, and a gigantic mammoth of a sunroof. '02-07 WRX suspension is a bolt in(less the front sway bar). WRX wagon struts and springs fit better than sedan. '98 Impreza RS/'97-99 Legacy GT power adders bolt straight in.
I do have to say that the 97 Outback I just sold had 402,000 km (about 250K miles) on it and the DOHC was still going strong. I assume that the HG had been done by then, so it is common that if they are done and done well these motors can go a loooooong time!
mr2peak wrote: The turbo manual version would definitely be what I'm after. The earlier cars when they were smaller and less SUV-ish. How interesting are they to drive? Does the car feel strange when the torque bias switches from front to rear like the R32 or is it a nice linear change? Are basic boost increases a problem or does it handle it in stride? Sounds like your Mother-in-Law has been quite happy with them! Ever autocross them? Issues with sticky tires and rolling over?
There's a local one to me that auto-x's. He dominates with that thing. Still has the rack and all. Pretty sure it's close to stock save wheels and tires.
For frame of reference IIRC- They only made the XT with a manual in the US for two years 04 and 05. WANT.
You, Sir ValuePack, deserve a beer and some icecream. Exactly the kind of information I was after!
Sounds like I'll be looking for an '04-'05 forester XT, unless I can pick up an early one for cheap with headgasket issues and fix it.
Ddavidv: sounds like an almost perfect car, but I'm in California. Hard to make the flight and drive worth it.
mr2peak wrote: You, Sir ValuePack, deserve a beer and some icecream. Exactly the kind of information I was after! Sounds like I'll be looking for an '04-'05 forester XT, unless I can pick up an early one for cheap with headgasket issues and fix it.
Eleven months sober, but I'll take some Ben and Jerry's, please.
For me, my '01 L was my fave of the lot. 87 octane, cushy when needed, terrifyingly fun to fling thru the twisties(nearly TOO tail happy with a 20mm WRX rear sway bar and an empty boot), had solid brakes, and was by no means slow with 4.11 gears and a broad torque curve. It was downright good at most everything. Give an old one a try before setting your sights on the turbo for good.
You'll need to log in to post.
