Page 4 of 20 FirstFirst 1234567814 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 200 of 978
  1. #151
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,112
    Quote Originally Posted by XJaredX View Post

    My current favorite, after finally seeing it in person, is the Desert Khaki. Not sure if I would choose it tho if I bought an XV but I love that they offered it.
    Of course you would

  2. #152
    mtbr member
    Reputation: in the trees's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,886
    We got the news that ours had been assembled a lintel before Christmas. Still awaiting its arrival in port. DGM, sunroof, Nav, etc.

  3. #153
    .44
    Reputation: stremf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    988
    I see gravitylover posted 35+mpg freeway already. Anyone else have highway MPG to report? Not interested in city mileage as there are just too many variables. Thanks.

  4. #154
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    282
    31mpg with snowboards on the roof and the 5speed model.

  5. #155
    mtbr member
    Reputation: AWDfreak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    211
    Quote Originally Posted by boudy View Post
    If you like to control your car and slide it around, look elsewhere.

    I have the manual. When you let off the gas the engine revs stay up. This means that if you get stuck in the snow you can't do the forward-back thing to work it out because it grinds when going from 1st to reverse.

    Furthermore the traction control does NOT turn off, even when the disable button is active. It robs the power. So when you're in the snow it cuts power, eliminating the benefits of AWD.

    Basically the care works against you. Its a huge disappointment.

    Subaru messed up the drive train on this car IMHO.
    What in the hell?

    Engine revs stay up? Doesn't that simply mean it has a heavy flywheel or something? Just let the revs go down before shifting gears?

    The VDC off disables most of the power-robbing properties of the VDC, but it is still active to make sure the car's AWD system is always transferring power efficiently and effectively. (Only the WRX STI, model years 2008 onwards, is the sole Subaru that has the ability to defeat VDC entirely without pulling a fuse)

    In your case, that meant killing the fun of getting the rear-end around. Might wanna look into what fuses may be able to disable the VDC entirely, but I would consult the advice of an expert before attempting that.


    Subaru didn't mess up the drive train...(or did they?) In your case, the VDC just seems too intrusive for you. Maybe a rear LSD may help get the car more spirited once you find a way to disable VDC?

  6. #156
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    4,148
    Does the 2.0 manual feel underpowered compared to the older 2.5 manuals in other like cars? This car has like 22 HP less than my 2009 Impreza.

  7. #157
    mtbr member
    Reputation: boudy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by AWDfreak View Post
    What in the hell?

    Engine revs stay up? Doesn't that simply mean it has a heavy flywheel or something? Just let the revs go down before shifting gears?

    The VDC off disables most of the power-robbing properties of the VDC, but it is still active to make sure the car's AWD system is always transferring power efficiently and effectively. (Only the WRX STI, model years 2008 onwards, is the sole Subaru that has the ability to defeat VDC entirely without pulling a fuse)

    In your case, that meant killing the fun of getting the rear-end around. Might wanna look into what fuses may be able to disable the VDC entirely, but I would consult the advice of an expert before attempting that.


    Subaru didn't mess up the drive train...(or did they?) In your case, the VDC just seems too intrusive for you. Maybe a rear LSD may help get the car more spirited once you find a way to disable VDC?
    I think its the programming of the throttle control that keeps the rev up. Its drive by wire so they can do whatever they want. The dealer tech told me it was deliberate.

    There are threads on NASIOC and on Forrester forums about this whole TC/VDC thing and how it neuters the car's ability to be driven through snow. The fuse that disables it also affects ABS and a few other things.

    All it takes is one wheel slipping abit and the the computer kills power to ALL of the wheels. The disable button seems to have a very slight affect.

    The point of driving a manual is to have fine grained control of the drive train.
    2012 Banshee Prime
    2011 Salsa Mukluk


    Wachusett NEMBA

  8. #158
    mtbr member
    Reputation: boudy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by stremf View Post
    I see gravitylover posted 35+mpg freeway already. Anyone else have highway MPG to report? Not interested in city mileage as there are just too many variables. Thanks.
    27 MPG average, mixed driving.
    2012 Banshee Prime
    2011 Salsa Mukluk


    Wachusett NEMBA

  9. #159
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    146
    Just ordered a Satin White Premium 5-speed!

    Planning on installing a Curt hitch:
    Trailer Hitch by Curt for 2013 XV - C11286

    Onto which I'll mount a Kuat Beta rack:
    Products » Beta | Küat

    My question: If I'm only ever going to carry a 2-bike rack on this hitch is there any reason that I should go with a 2" rack and receiver rather than the 1.25" rack and receiver? I think the 1.25" receiver looks cleaner when the rack is not attached.

    Thanks!
    Last edited by Zirkel; 01-17-2013 at 10:11 PM.

  10. #160
    .44
    Reputation: stremf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    988
    Zirkel - I just got my hitch installed tonight on my 2013 Outback. $230 out the door at uhaul. It's tucked away really well and I can't even see the receiver unless I crouch down. Lifetime warranty, too, even if I mangle it up in an accident.

    I'd go for a 2". The 1.25" tends to sway too much for me. Plus you'll have more hitch accessory options. Also, if you ever decide to tow, well, you're already set up.

  11. #161
    mtbr member
    Reputation: AWDfreak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    211
    Quote Originally Posted by boudy View Post
    I think its the programming of the throttle control that keeps the rev up. Its drive by wire so they can do whatever they want. The dealer tech told me it was deliberate.

    There are threads on NASIOC and on Forrester forums about this whole TC/VDC thing and how it neuters the car's ability to be driven through snow. The fuse that disables it also affects ABS and a few other things.

    All it takes is one wheel slipping abit and the the computer kills power to ALL of the wheels. The disable button seems to have a very slight affect.

    The point of driving a manual is to have fine grained control of the drive train.
    Aw... that's disappointing to be honest...

    So I guess if one wants to turn VDC off for good, gotta get a WRX STI... *sigh*


    I heard the same fuse that affects VDC and ABS will even affect the speedometer

    Drive-by-wire throttle for the lose? This is why I want to have multiple Subarus for specific applications. One of those Subarus will be a carbureted mid 1980's 4WD Subaru GL wagon with a dual-range manual transmission.

  12. #162
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    282
    Quote Originally Posted by Zirkel View Post
    Just ordered a Satin White Premium 5-speed!

    Planning on installing a Curt hitch:
    Trailer Hitch by Curt for 2013 XV - C11286

    Onto which I'll mount a Kuat Beta rack:
    Products » Beta | Küat

    My question: If I'm only ever going to carry a 2-bike rack on this hitch is there any reason that I should go with a 2" rack and receiver rather than the 1.25" rack and receiver? I think the 1.25" receiver looks cleaner when the rack is not attached.

    Thanks!
    No need for a 2" period as the car is only meant to tow up to 1500 lbs. Have you thought of going with the factory hitch? It is a very clean fit and you can only see the tip.

  13. #163
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    146
    Tech420: From what I've read, and after reviewing the pdf installation instructions, the factory hitch requires the entire bumper to be removed in order to be installed. It's quite an extensive job that your dealership would need to complete. The Curt hitch is simple 4-bolt installation to the existing frame (that requires slightly enlarging 2 holes with a dremel tool) that even I could do at home. It also looks very clean and low profile in photos that I've seen.

    My question is whether to go with the 2" or 1.25" rack & receiver to carry two XC bikes? Is the 1.25" sufficiently stable enough for the job?

    Thanks!

  14. #164
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    282
    Quote Originally Posted by Zirkel View Post
    Tech420: From what I've read, and after reviewing the pdf installation instructions, the factory hitch requires the entire bumper to be removed in order to be installed. It's quite an extensive job that your dealership would need to complete. The Curt hitch is simple 4-bolt installation to the existing frame (that requires slightly enlarging 2 holes with a dremel tool) that even I could do at home. It also looks very clean and low profile in photos that I've seen.

    My question is whether to go with the 2" or 1.25" rack & receiver to carry two XC bikes? Is the 1.25" sufficiently stable enough for the job?

    Thanks!
    I had the dealer do mine There is no need for a 2" hitch when the car can't tow over 1500lbs. 2 bikes won't cause any type of issue at all. I had a hitch rack with 2 bikes on it for a few days before switching to my roof rack and it was perfectly fine.

  15. #165
    .44
    Reputation: stremf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    988
    I guess my experience is different. 1.25" swayed too much for me with one bike on the back. I was using a Thule Apex rack. 2" provided better stability, especially when going over rough roads to get to some of the trailheads. 2" has way more attachment options and doesn't hinder ground clearance. If anything, it would protect your rear bumper from getting torn apart.

    My dealer wanted $700 for the factory rack (1.25"). Uhaul charged $230 out the door. It's recessed about 2" from the end of the bumper so can't even tell it's there.

  16. #166
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rideut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    121
    Walked into the dealer today to get an impreza 5 door for my wife. Did not want to order and wait for a crosstrek. Just so happens a crosstrek came in a few hours before and it was not spoken for! Traded her car in for 20% more than carmax offered so we pulled the trigger right away! Dark gray w/ black cloth interior. Will post pics soon.

  17. #167
    govt kontrakt projkt mgr
    Reputation: ArmySlowRdr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,158
    Quote Originally Posted by XJaredX View Post
    Also, a lot of people test the stock radio and think it sounds like crap solely based off the FM radio. It sounds wayyyyy better with BT-a or iPod
    Agree---the FM is cr+p in my new outback. Especially the HD stations as the volume continuously goes down, up or cuts out. At least not that way on regular stations.

    The iPOD does sound good.

  18. #168
    mtbr member
    Reputation: trrubicon06's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    257
    Curt 2" hitch




  19. #169
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rideut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    121
    Nice, just ordered one off amazon, easy install?

  20. #170
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    146
    RideUT: Check out the installation video near the bottom of this page:

    Trailer Hitch by Curt for 2013 XV - C11286

    Trrubicon: That is one sweet looking ride (and I'm not talking about the bike!).

  21. #171
    mtbr member
    Reputation: trrubicon06's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    257
    Quote Originally Posted by rideut View Post
    Nice, just ordered one off amazon, easy install?

    Only tough part is enlarging the rear holes. I used a stepped drill bit, but you can use a metal file to make notches on each side of the holes. Just enough to allow the rear carriage bolt and plate to go through.

    I would suggest having a second hand or a rolling Jack to lift the hitch up while bolting up.




    Quote Originally Posted by Zirkel View Post
    Trrubicon: That is one sweet looking ride (and I'm not talking about the bike!).
    Thanks! I love it

  22. #172
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    2,723
    Quote Originally Posted by ArmySlowRdr View Post
    Agree---the FM is cr+p in my new outback. Especially the HD stations as the volume continuously goes down, up or cuts out. At least not that way on regular stations.

    The iPOD does sound good.
    Is it because it is fading in and out of HD?

    Anyways, check this out- this applies to you because you have the display audio system, this may help you:

    ('11+) Impreza Limited "Hidden" Audio Menu - NASIOC
    '15 Specialized Fatboy
    '14 Kona Zone Two
    '13 Surly Big Dummy

  23. #173
    ballbuster
    Reputation: pimpbot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    12,702
    Quote Originally Posted by AWDfreak View Post
    What in the hell?

    Engine revs stay up? Doesn't that simply mean it has a heavy flywheel or something? Just let the revs go down before shifting gears?

    The VDC off disables most of the power-robbing properties of the VDC, but it is still active to make sure the car's AWD system is always transferring power efficiently and effectively. (Only the WRX STI, model years 2008 onwards, is the sole Subaru that has the ability to defeat VDC entirely without pulling a fuse)

    In your case, that meant killing the fun of getting the rear-end around. Might wanna look into what fuses may be able to disable the VDC entirely, but I would consult the advice of an expert before attempting that.


    Subaru didn't mess up the drive train...(or did they?) In your case, the VDC just seems too intrusive for you. Maybe a rear LSD may help get the car more spirited once you find a way to disable VDC?
    I've seen a lot of engines do this for emissions. Sorta like, it's trying to burn off the unburned gas in deceleration.

  24. #174
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    23,977
    Quote Originally Posted by pimpbot View Post
    I've seen a lot of engines do this for emissions. Sorta like, it's trying to burn off the unburned gas in deceleration.
    What unburned gas? Injectors shut off when your car is coasting and just using engine compression. Modern engines are very good in this regard, in that they don't put fuel into the cylinders that isn't going to be burned (except during start/warmup, which has other methods to help alleviate this).
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  25. #175
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    2,723
    I think your car is effed,boudy- I've been in plenty of manual Subarus with the VDC turned off and it does not rob power, and I've been able to rock the car back and forth in the snow. They didn't really screw up the drivetrain, as it's been largely unchanged for about a decade now. I think you should get that looked at.

    One thing- when you tried rocking the car, was the engine still warming up? They intially idle at like 1500 for a while.
    '15 Specialized Fatboy
    '14 Kona Zone Two
    '13 Surly Big Dummy

  26. #176
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    4,148
    Quote Originally Posted by XJaredX View Post
    I think your car is effed,boudy- I've been in plenty of manual Subarus with the VDC turned off and it does not rob power, and I've been able to rock the car back and forth in the snow. They didn't really screw up the drivetrain, as it's been largely unchanged for about a decade now. I think you should get that looked at.

    One thing- when you tried rocking the car, was the engine still warming up? They intially idle at like 1500 for a while.
    My 09 appears to turn off ... my 02 doesn't have it and is all about power-slides on national forest roads.

  27. #177
    The Mud Stud
    Reputation: Dirt Bringer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    1,402
    Quote Originally Posted by XJaredX View Post
    I think your car is effed,boudy- I've been in plenty of manual Subarus with the VDC turned off and it does not rob power, and I've been able to rock the car back and forth in the snow. They didn't really screw up the drivetrain, as it's been largely unchanged for about a decade now. I think you should get that looked at.

    One thing- when you tried rocking the car, was the engine still warming up? They intially idle at like 1500 for a while.
    I was thinking something similar. I have a 2013 Impreza and in the snow with vdc off I can do donuts and drifts all day long. Even some powerslides with enough space. The VDC does turn on at extreme angles but doesn't really straighten out the car, its more like its trying to keep the donut in check and prevent a complete spin, at least I think that's what I felt (brakes grabbing on the side going into the slide. Either way it takes some pretty extreme angles to get it to kick in and engine rpm's were not affected at all, in fact it sat happily around 5 or 6k rpm and spun like crazy. I'm not sure if the programming for the Crosstrek is different, but I wouldn't imagine it would differ greatly.

  28. #178
    keepin' it rural
    Reputation: summud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    440

    Invisible Hitch from Torklift!

    They are making a hitch that utilizes the knock-out on the rear bumper. you can replace the knock out cover when not in use. pretty sweet!

    Torklift Central Eco-Hitch Invisi 2" Subaru XV Crosstrek Trailer Hitch | Torklift Central

    Installation video:

    2013 Subaru XV Crosstrek Invisi/Hidden Ecohitch Trailer Hitch Installation-Torklift Central - YouTube

  29. #179
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rideut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    121
    Quote Originally Posted by summud View Post
    They are making a hitch that utilizes the knock-out on the rear bumper. you can replace the knock out cover when not in use. pretty sweet!

    Torklift Central Eco-Hitch Invisi 2" Subaru XV Crosstrek Trailer Hitch | Torklift Central

    Installation video:

    2013 Subaru XV Crosstrek Invisi/Hidden Ecohitch Trailer Hitch Installation-Torklift Central - YouTube
    Nice find. Too bad I just bought a Curt hitch, on the upside it was $100 cheaper.

  30. #180
    mtbr member
    Reputation: trrubicon06's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    257
    Quote Originally Posted by summud View Post
    They are making a hitch that utilizes the knock-out on the rear bumper. you can replace the knock out cover when not in use. pretty sweet!

    Torklift Central Eco-Hitch Invisi 2" Subaru XV Crosstrek Trailer Hitch | Torklift Central

    Installation video:

    2013 Subaru XV Crosstrek Invisi/Hidden Ecohitch Trailer Hitch Installation-Torklift Central - YouTube
    OK...here's my question. Where the f@$% do you put the retaining pin at? Get on your hands and knees, or possibly on your back just to insert a pin? Don't get me wrong...its very sweet, but I'd be happy if it stuck out of the hole and allowed me to insert a pin like normal.

  31. #181
    mtbr member
    Reputation: in the trees's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,886
    Ours arrived at the dealership on Thurs. Picking it up this AM!!! Psyched!!!

  32. #182
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    282
    Quote Originally Posted by in the trees View Post
    Ours arrived at the dealership on Thurs. Picking it up this AM!!! Psyched!!!
    Congrats it is an awesome car. What model did you get and any extra add-ons? Post up a pic or two.

  33. #183
    Tree Hugger
    Reputation: Sasquatch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,946

    Why not get the 2014 Forester instead?

    I was pretty interested in getting a Crosstrek to replace my 1997 Honda Fit. The Crosstrek only gets 2-3 miles less per gallon than the Fit. I was nearly sold on the Crosstrek until I started looking at the 2014 Forester. The Forester starts at nearly the same price as a Crosstrek, and gets almost as good mpg (24/32 vs 25/33.) They have alot more space inside for passengers and cargo. The Forester has the same ground clearance as the Crosstrek.

    So what does the Crosstrek have going for it over the Forester? Is it style? Do you think the Crosstrek will offer a better driving experience than a 2.0 Forester? Do they use the same type AWD system, or is the Crosstrek better in dicey conditions?

    I'm not trolling, I really want to hear what people think when comparing the Crosstrek to a 2014 Forester? The upper end Foresters get expensive, but the base ($23,800) and premium ($25,800) 2.0 Foresters with CVT are the same price as the premium and limited Crosstrek.
    I love mankind - it's people I can't stand. ~Charles M. Schulz

  34. #184
    mtbr member
    Reputation: AWDfreak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    211
    Quote Originally Posted by Sasquatch View Post
    I was pretty interested in getting a Crosstrek to replace my 1997 Honda Fit. The Crosstrek only gets 2-3 miles less per gallon than the Fit. I was nearly sold on the Crosstrek until I started looking at the 2014 Forester. The Forester starts at nearly the same price as a Crosstrek, and gets almost as good mpg (24/32 vs 25/33.) They have alot more space inside for passengers and cargo. The Forester has the same ground clearance as the Crosstrek.

    So what does the Crosstrek have going for it over the Forester? Is it style? Do you think the Crosstrek will offer a better driving experience than a 2.0 Forester? Do they use the same type AWD system, or is the Crosstrek better in dicey conditions?

    I'm not trolling, I really want to hear what people think when comparing the Crosstrek to a 2014 Forester? The upper end Foresters get expensive, but the base ($23,800) and premium ($25,800) 2.0 Foresters with CVT are the same price as the premium and limited Crosstrek.
    There are a few differences.

    One, the size. Now both are compact vehicles, but the Forester offers more space, and a larger engine. (The XV has the 148HP FB20, the Forester has the 170HP FB25). However, the XV is lighter which means it may be able to handle better than the Forester.

    Both have the same AWD systems. The AWD system you get depends on your transmission choice. (Continuous AWD for manual transmission, Active AWD for CVT Lineartronic).
    If you want a manual transmission, the Forester might be better as it has a 6-speed manual, rather than the XV's old 5-speed manual.

    The XV has an advantage in urban maneuvering over the Forester as it is smaller. If you live in an urban area, the XV would be better for parking. If you don't worry much about size for parking, go for the Forester.

    However, one key advantage the non-turbo Forester may have over the XV is Subaru's newly-developed X-MODE. It's a mode for the VDC, CVT, and other related-systems to work together in harmony for low-traction situations (such as off-roading, snow, etc), in addition to having a hill-descent control.


    Here's a video of a Subaru of America representative elaborating about the new X-MODE

    2014 Subaru Forester: Everything you wanted to know about the car and the new X-Mode AWD - YouTube

  35. #185
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    2,191
    Quote Originally Posted by Sasquatch View Post
    I was pretty interested in getting a Crosstrek to replace my 1997 Honda Fit. The Crosstrek only gets 2-3 miles less per gallon than the Fit. I was nearly sold on the Crosstrek until I started looking at the 2014 Forester. The Forester starts at nearly the same price as a Crosstrek, and gets almost as good mpg (24/32 vs 25/33.) They have alot more space inside for passengers and cargo. The Forester has the same ground clearance as the Crosstrek.

    So what does the Crosstrek have going for it over the Forester? Is it style? Do you think the Crosstrek will offer a better driving experience than a 2.0 Forester? Do they use the same type AWD system, or is the Crosstrek better in dicey conditions?

    I'm not trolling, I really want to hear what people think when comparing the Crosstrek to a 2014 Forester? The upper end Foresters get expensive, but the base ($23,800) and premium ($25,800) 2.0 Foresters with CVT are the same price as the premium and limited Crosstrek.

    Welcome to my dilemma.
    Oh noes. I'm going to drink the Kool-Aid.

  36. #186
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    282
    I can't comment on the Forester, but my XV drives more like a car than an SUV. That may turn out to be the biggest difference between the two. One as more of a tall car and the other is a mid-size SUV. If you're in no rush I would wait it out so you can compare the two. You can't go wrong either way.

  37. #187
    mtbr member
    Reputation: in the trees's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,886
    Quote Originally Posted by Tech420 View Post
    Congrats it is an awesome car. What model did you get and any extra add-ons? Post up a pic or two.
    No pics yet....but Limited loaded - sunroof, Nav, all-weather mats, wheel locals, Homelink, bumper cover. Very nice car!

  38. #188
    The Mud Stud
    Reputation: Dirt Bringer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    1,402
    Quote Originally Posted by AWDfreak View Post
    There are a few differences.

    One, the size. Now both are compact vehicles, but the Forester offers more space, and a larger engine. (The XV has the 148HP FB20, the Forester has the 170HP FB25). However, the XV is lighter which means it may be able to handle better than the Forester.

    Both have the same AWD systems. The AWD system you get depends on your transmission choice. (Continuous AWD for manual transmission, Active AWD for CVT Lineartronic).
    If you want a manual transmission, the Forester might be better as it has a 6-speed manual, rather than the XV's old 5-speed manual.

    The XV has an advantage in urban maneuvering over the Forester as it is smaller. If you live in an urban area, the XV would be better for parking. If you don't worry much about size for parking, go for the Forester.

    However, one key advantage the non-turbo Forester may have over the XV is Subaru's newly-developed X-MODE. It's a mode for the VDC, CVT, and other related-systems to work together in harmony for low-traction situations (such as off-roading, snow, etc), in addition to having a hill-descent control.


    Here's a video of a Subaru of America representative elaborating about the new X-MODE

    2014 Subaru Forester: Everything you wanted to know about the car and the new X-Mode AWD - YouTube
    X-MODE, previously known as viscous differentials, low range and driver skill. All no longer required.

  39. #189
    mtbr member
    Reputation: AWDfreak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    211
    Quote Originally Posted by Dirt Bringer View Post
    X-MODE, previously known as viscous differentials, low range and driver skill. All no longer required.
    Yeah, seems Subaru doesn't want to bother with installing the viscous limited-slip differentials anymore.. I also wish we could get the low-range manual gearboxes too...

  40. #190
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    2,723
    The times, they are a'changin'. I would prefer mechanical diffs, but the electronic aids are advancing in such a way that it is simply cheaper to have the electronics take over. At least I assume this is the case when I saw the rear LSD's disappearing from Outbacks and such around '09 when VDC was standardized on all models.
    '15 Specialized Fatboy
    '14 Kona Zone Two
    '13 Surly Big Dummy

  41. #191
    mtbr member
    Reputation: boudy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by Dirt Bringer View Post
    X-MODE, previously known as viscous differentials, low range and driver skill. All no longer required.
    Yup, keep dumbing down the driver. Can't let driving the car interfere with an all important phone call or text message.

    Just wait until all of this electronic ******** starts showing up on bicycles (ABS, traction control, ...).
    2012 Banshee Prime
    2011 Salsa Mukluk


    Wachusett NEMBA

  42. #192
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    4,148
    Seems like the Crosstrek will drive more like a Forester than an Impreza anyway because of the increased ride height? I still don't like the loss of HP and engine displacement. Our 09 Impreza blows the doors off our Forester since it's lighter and still has 170 HP; handling is better too with way less body lean. Are all the new model going to be made in the USA?

  43. #193
    .44
    Reputation: stremf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    988
    Quote Originally Posted by Sasquatch View Post
    I was pretty interested in getting a Crosstrek to replace my 1997 Honda Fit. The Crosstrek only gets 2-3 miles less per gallon than the Fit. I was nearly sold on the Crosstrek until I started looking at the 2014 Forester. The Forester starts at nearly the same price as a Crosstrek, and gets almost as good mpg (24/32 vs 25/33.) They have alot more space inside for passengers and cargo. The Forester has the same ground clearance as the Crosstrek.

    So what does the Crosstrek have going for it over the Forester? Is it style? Do you think the Crosstrek will offer a better driving experience than a 2.0 Forester? Do they use the same type AWD system, or is the Crosstrek better in dicey conditions?

    I'm not trolling, I really want to hear what people think when comparing the Crosstrek to a 2014 Forester? The upper end Foresters get expensive, but the base ($23,800) and premium ($25,800) 2.0 Foresters with CVT are the same price as the premium and limited Crosstrek.
    This is a similar situation I was in a few months ago choosing between the Forester and Outback. Outback had much bigger rear storage and fit our family better. MPG was nearly identical (Outback was actually better at 30MPG), so looking at it from that standpoint, it didn't make sense to go with the Forester. From a financial perspective, the Outback was $2-3k more, but we felt it was worth it.

    Between the Crosstrek and Forester, I think it highly depends on your situation. Do you need the extra room? Do you have kids/family? If not, I'd pick the Crosstrek. Cheaper, lighter/nimble, and (IMO) cooler looking. But if you need the room (now or in the near future), the Forester is the better choice. I really like the headroom and the front driver's and passenger room feels bigger due to the higher roof (like vaulted ceilings). Heavier than Crosstrek, yes, but that also has advantages. It rides better on-road due to the extra heft, which helps on longer trips. Granted I haven't driven the Crosstrek, but if it's anything like my sister's Impreza, it does have the small car feel to it and longer road trips did take more of a toll on the body.

    Size wise, I really can't see a scenario where the Crosstrek would fit and Forester wouldn't. Even in an urban setting. I don't think this would be an issue either way.

  44. #194
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    2,723
    Quote Originally Posted by SS Hack View Post
    Seems like the Crosstrek will drive more like a Forester than an Impreza anyway because of the increased ride height? I still don't like the loss of HP and engine displacement. Our 09 Impreza blows the doors off our Forester since it's lighter and still has 170 HP; handling is better too with way less body lean. Are all the new model going to be made in the USA?
    I promise you that the XV is almost imperceptibly different from the normal Impreza in driving- I was shocked at how little body roll there is. The main difference is the feel of the tires, as the XV is on 17" Geolandars like the Foresters. But seriously, it handles way more like an Impreza than a Forester.
    '15 Specialized Fatboy
    '14 Kona Zone Two
    '13 Surly Big Dummy

  45. #195
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    4,148
    Quote Originally Posted by XJaredX View Post
    I promise you that the XV is almost imperceptibly different from the normal Impreza in driving- I was shocked at how little body roll there is. The main difference is the feel of the tires, as the XV is on 17" Geolandars like the Foresters. But seriously, it handles way more like an Impreza than a Forester.
    That's good to here, how about the power loss over the older units?

  46. #196
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    2,723
    Quote Originally Posted by SS Hack View Post
    That's good to here, how about the power loss over the older units?
    Absolutely blown out of proportion! People were just looking at the drop of HP from 170 to 148, yet for some reason nobody mentions that the new car is actually slightly faster than the 08-11 Imprezas, or that the 12+ weigh like 150-180 lbs less than the 08-11. It's stupid, every time I see someone whine about that on the internet I bang my head on the desk.

    Now, yeah, it would have been sweet if they kept the 170 hp on the 12+ cars with the less weight and such, but they wanted fuel economy, so to increase fuel economy by a full 30% while not making the car slower is quite a nice balance, methinks.
    '15 Specialized Fatboy
    '14 Kona Zone Two
    '13 Surly Big Dummy

  47. #197
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    4,148
    Quote Originally Posted by XJaredX View Post
    Absolutely blown out of proportion! People were just looking at the drop of HP from 170 to 148, yet for some reason nobody mentions that the new car is actually slightly faster than the 08-11 Imprezas, or that the 12+ weigh like 150-180 lbs less than the 08-11. It's stupid, every time I see someone whine about that on the internet I bang my head on the desk.

    Now, yeah, it would have been sweet if they kept the 170 hp on the 12+ cars with the less weight and such, but they wanted fuel economy, so to increase fuel economy by a full 30% while not making the car slower is quite a nice balance, methinks.
    That's nice to hear, I haven't driven one and wanted to know. I have two growing boys, so it'll be Outback next time anyway for us. I like my 09 and 02 for the time being and will drive them until they blow. We average 28 mpg on the 09 Impreza, no way the new ones have an extra 30 percent on that as it would be 36 overall.

  48. #198
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    2,723
    ^ For the normal Impreza, the highway on the automatic went from 27 to 36. Most people get like 38ish at 70mph.

    City driving went from 20 on the 08-11 to 27 on the 12+. I haven't really paid attention to what people typically get in pure city driving, as usually the people worried about fuel economy drive mostly highway.

    For you to be getting an average of 28 on your 09 is really good- do you do mostly highway/backroads?

    In any event, going from 27 to 36 is a 30% increase, without even factoring in that the highway average on the 2012+ are rather underrated. And that is awesome.
    '15 Specialized Fatboy
    '14 Kona Zone Two
    '13 Surly Big Dummy

  49. #199
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    4,148
    Quote Originally Posted by XJaredX View Post
    ^ For the normal Impreza, the highway on the automatic went from 27 to 36. Most people get like 38ish at 70mph.

    City driving went from 20 on the 08-11 to 27 on the 12+. I haven't really paid attention to what people typically get in pure city driving, as usually the people worried about fuel economy drive mostly highway.

    For you to be getting an average of 28 on your 09 is really good- do you do mostly highway/backroads?

    In any event, going from 27 to 36 is a 30% increase, without even factoring in that the highway average on the 2012+ are rather underrated. And that is awesome.
    I never learned how to drive an automatic. We get 28 with a 50/50 mix of driving. Our 02 Forrester is much worse.

  50. #200
    .44
    Reputation: stremf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    988
    Quote Originally Posted by SS Hack View Post
    I never learned how to drive an automatic. We get 28 with a 50/50 mix of driving. Our 02 Forrester is much worse.
    Just as a reference point of how much more efficient these new cars are, we're getting 27MPG on our bloated Outback, mixed driving. Highway-only returns 33MPG. We get slightly better MPG's than lowlander folks (I'm at 4500 ft elev) due to leaner burning engines and less air resistence.

Page 4 of 20 FirstFirst 1234567814 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •