Forester 10 years 170k miles.review- trading in

[Joe1]

I purchased the base model Forester with 5 speed MT in early 2005. The time has come to move on, but I thought I'd share my ownership experience with it.

The pros: Extremely reliable until final year. Solid build quality. The car still has a solid "tightness" and has aged very well. Zero rust after 10 years of Northeast winters. AWD system very good. Engine is still strong and I did not have any head gasket issues that many said were not if, but when.

The cons: A bit more wind noise at highway speeds than I cared for. It had a propensity to consume oil. It typically required 1.5 quarts of fill oil between 10k oil change intervals. Mileage was lackluster, but the MPGs improved a bit with the Bridgestone Ecopia tires I had on for the last 25k miles. I was getting 32 MPG highway with the Ecopias. I was lucky to hit 30 without them.

In the last year, the AC has developed issues. The mechanic recommended charging it frequently as opposed to going through the expense of installing a new compressor in a 10 year old car. I had problems with the brakes recently. It was something related to the ABS that would be relatively costly to repair. The mechanic could not diagnose the issue with the brakes and recommended I go to the Subaru dealer to get it properly diagnosed.

My wife does not like the MT and we are a one-car family as we mostly commute to work by public transportation.

With that being said, we decided to trade it in for a new Impreza 5 door with CVT.

I really hate to give the car up, but it is time to move on. If I had the mechanical ability to make DIY repairs, I'd hold on to it. I don't think it is cost effective to have a professional mechanic to do all work on a vehicle this old with so many miles on the odometer.

I'll give a review of the Impreza after I have a few weeks to drive it.

 

[JTK]

You had a good run with it Joe, especially if that's all you had to do to it the past 10yrs. I'm assuming you had the timing belt replaced at some point too?

You'll enjoy your new Impreza. I've got the XV Crosstrek version of it and wish I had gone with the CVT as opposed to the 5spd manual. I loved the CVT in my 2012 Legacy.

 

[Burt]

Would be nice if the ac lasted more than 10 years, but doesn't sound like you could ask for much more. Amazing how high our expectations are on cars these days.

May I ask how you put 17,000 miles a year on the car if you don't drive it daily to work? That's a lot of weekend and vacation driving.

 

[ARCOgraphite]

The forester is a lot more car for only a couple thou more than the impreza. Good luck though anyway. I was looking for a base Legacy that looks good (Ford-esque)and couldn't find one last winter.
We paid ~21K for the 2015 Foz stick. Get 32mpg all day long which is awesome.
I hate CVTs. They are inherently lossy as power is ALWAYS transfe
rred through the belt pully system with tight pully radius. I would have looked at a toy rav 4 just to get a traditional 5speed(?) auto.

 

[millerbl00]

Hopefully you will get 10 years out of the cvt.....

You might miss the MT in the long haul....

 

[Phishin]

Originally Posted By: Joe1
I was getting 32 MPG highway with the Ecopias. I was lucky to hit 30 without them.


Excuse me? Why the huge difference in my wife's 2009 Forester that 4 cylinder and a 5 speed auto transmission? I've driven that thing 70-75mph on long freeway trips and can't get much more than 24.5mpg's out of it. How can a 2005 with a MT get 30-32?

 

[JTK]

Originally Posted By: Phishin
Originally Posted By: Joe1
I was getting 32 MPG highway with the Ecopias. I was lucky to hit 30 without them.


Excuse me? Why the huge difference in my wife's 2009 Forester that 4 cylinder and a 5 speed auto transmission? I've driven that thing 70-75mph on long freeway trips and can't get much more than 24.5mpg's out of it. How can a 2005 with a MT get 30-32?


Phishin, I think a lot of people vary the way they calculate MPGs and typically overestimate. For me, it's all about the average over an entire tank of fuel. I don't care about that short trip that got me something very high or disturbingly low. Another oddity is the dash computer. The dash computer on my 2014 XV Crosstrek 5spd settles out at an average of ~32mpg. Calculating it by hand typically gets me ~29mpg tank/tank.

 

[Nate1979]

Originally Posted By: Phishin
Originally Posted By: Joe1
I was getting 32 MPG highway with the Ecopias. I was lucky to hit 30 without them.


Excuse me? Why the huge difference in my wife's 2009 Forester that 4 cylinder and a 5 speed auto transmission? I've driven that thing 70-75mph on long freeway trips and can't get much more than 24.5mpg's out of it. How can a 2005 with a MT get 30-32?


We have a 2010 and get very similar mpg to you. 30mpg would be a dream in ours.

 

[Joe1]

To answer the previous questions:

I had the timing belt changed at 100k and generally adhered to the owners manual for servicing.

I drove to work on my last job and I use the car often on weekends to go on hiking or fishing trips etc.

The 32 MPG highway quote is for 100% highway driving. Absolutely no stop and go city driving. Speeds were generally 65-70 MPH. In mixed city highway driving, the car averaged between 22-24 mpg. Also, that is summer driving. In the winter, the MPGS dropped off a bit. I've seen others in the Forester forums report similar highway MPGs for that generation of Forester. I drive with a light foot at constant speeds on the highway and don't carry a lot of excess weight in the car.

 

[dwcopple]

If you haven't done the deal yet, you really might wanna rethink that whole CVT thing. They are awful.

 

[WhyMe]

Originally Posted By: Phishin
Originally Posted By: Joe1
I was getting 32 MPG highway with the Ecopias. I was lucky to hit 30 without them.


Excuse me? Why the huge difference in my wife's 2009 Forester that 4 cylinder and a 5 speed auto transmission? I've driven that thing 70-75mph on long freeway trips and can't get much more than 24.5mpg's out of it. How can a 2005 with a MT get 30-32?


my 99 outback with 250k got 29mpg on a 225 mile highway trip last weekend. i get 22-24 mixed city.

 

[Joe1]

Originally Posted By: dwcopple
If you haven't done the deal yet, you really might wanna rethink that whole CVT thing. They are awful.


Thanks for the input. I appreciate your comments. I was aware of the pros and cons of the CVT before making the decision and realize that they are not for everybody.

 

[JTK]

Originally Posted By: Joe1


Thanks for the input. I appreciate your comments. I was aware of the pros and cons of the CVT before making the decision and realize that they are not for everybody.


Yeah, it's almost worth not mentioning it. If you want to keep the thread on track that is. A lot of opinion given with absolutely zero long term experience with them.

 

[zach1900]

1.5 qt. Of oil over 10,000 miles is a drinker?

 

[Rand]

Originally Posted By: Phishin


Excuse me? Why the huge difference in my wife's 2009 Forester that 4 cylinder and a 5 speed auto transmission? I've driven that thing 70-75mph on long freeway trips and can't get much more than 24.5mpg's out of it. How can a 2005 with a MT get 30-32?


you have a 4 speed auto, your car is also "boxier", and heavier with the same basic engine.

Try getting LRR tires and driving at 65mph or less and you should be near 30mpg highway.

My 2011 which had the fb25 easily would pass 30mpg with the stock tires@65mph sometimes 33-34mpg but was hard to tell if there was a tailwind or not.

The 2015 will get 33-35mpg at 65mph if there is no bad wind even with ac on with the right tires.

I would guess difference between a Michelin premier and an energy saver is easily 5%

 

[pbm]

Originally Posted By: zach1900
1.5 qt. Of oil over 10,000 miles is a drinker?



I think a lot of owners of new Subies would be very happy to 'only' use 1.5 qts. of oil over 10K. It seems that in an effort to increase MPG's (low tension rings) Subaru has created oil guzzlers...

 

[ExMachina]

Originally Posted By: Rand

I would guess difference between a Michelin premier and an energy saver is easily 5%


Consumer Reports agrees with that, saying 1 to 2 MPG gained. Not bad. Thats getting rid of extra drag, so we just freed up some hp as well.

 

[rjundi]

Originally Posted By: dwcopple
If you haven't done the deal yet, you really might wanna rethink that whole CVT thing. They are awful.


Have you actually driven the Subaru version of CVT or just generalizing. They definitely are garbage applications and decent in others. You cannot generalize as I have driven apparently "best" of Subaru/Honda and the worst Jeep Patriot(trash). They differ massively.

 

[rjundi]

Originally Posted By: zach1900
1.5 qt. Of oil over 10,000 miles is a drinker?


Seriously...OCI is 7500 miles on this vehicle normal and 3750 severe.

 

[rjundi]

On AC I'd get a second opinion. Mechanics vary vastly on diagnosis.

Case in point my wife's 2005 Legacy GT wagon had AC issues. One "mechanic" with certs etc came back with compressor and few other bits for $1000+.

The indy Subie guy(took two days) traced it down to wiring harness issue as he could touch and not touch it and make it work or not + slight charge to make freezing. Bill total $120.

If I let the first "expert" work on it I would be a same place since issue was wiring harness not his $1000 proposal.