Page 8 of 30 FirstFirst ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 18 ... LastLast
Results 176 to 200 of 727
  1. #176
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3,125
    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.

  2. #177
    The Mud Stud
    Reputation: Dirt Bringer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    1,370
    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.

  3. #178
    keepin' it rural
    Reputation: summud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    436

    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

  4. #179
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rideut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    120
    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.

  5. #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.

  6. #181
    mtbr member
    Reputation: in the trees's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,818
    Ours arrived at the dealership on Thurs. Picking it up this AM!!! Psyched!!!

  7. #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.

  8. #183
    Tree Hugger
    Reputation: Sasquatch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,938

    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

  9. #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

  10. #185
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1,854
    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.

  11. #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.

  12. #187
    mtbr member
    Reputation: in the trees's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,818
    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!

  13. #188
    The Mud Stud
    Reputation: Dirt Bringer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    1,370
    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.

  14. #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...

  15. #190
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    2,232
    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.
    Transition Bandit 29
    Surly Ogre
    Surly Necro Pugs w/ Lefty PBR
    Surly Big Dummy

  16. #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

  17. #192
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3,125
    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?

  18. #193
    .44
    Reputation: stremf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    407
    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.

  19. #194
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    2,232
    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.
    Transition Bandit 29
    Surly Ogre
    Surly Necro Pugs w/ Lefty PBR
    Surly Big Dummy

  20. #195
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3,125
    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?

  21. #196
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    2,232
    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.
    Transition Bandit 29
    Surly Ogre
    Surly Necro Pugs w/ Lefty PBR
    Surly Big Dummy

  22. #197
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3,125
    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.

  23. #198
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    2,232
    ^ 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.
    Transition Bandit 29
    Surly Ogre
    Surly Necro Pugs w/ Lefty PBR
    Surly Big Dummy

  24. #199
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3,125
    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.

  25. #200
    .44
    Reputation: stremf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    407
    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 8 of 30 FirstFirst ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 18 ... 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
  •