Just got a 2016 Subaru Forester.

Joined
Mar 5, 2015
Messages
2,478
Location
Juno Beach FL
I have a 2014 subie base model outback with CVT. I too think the CVT works just great. I've tested the paddle shifters which send it through fixed gears 1 to 6. I've driven MT cars before, but never more than 5 gears. Six forward speeds seems like just too much shifting, can't imagine driving a 6 speed MT in heavy traffic commuting every day, must feel like driving a MT heavy truck with a lot of forward gears.
 
Joined
Aug 21, 2003
Messages
204
Location
long island n.y.
SeaJay, I agree, the CVT seems fine. It supposedly gets a bit better MPG than the MT. The display indicates 24mpg for mine in suburban driving, so a bit low. I plan to check the right way with fill ups at the pump as I'm not sure how accurate the display is. Anyone hear of reliability problems with the CVT? I plan to change the fluid in a few years if its possible for a DIYer to do. I thought I read that dealers are asking $600 to change the fluid.
 

JTK

Thread starter
Joined
Aug 14, 2003
Messages
13,816
Location
Buffalo, NY
I've never read of a Subaru CVT failure and they've been on the road since the intro of the 2010+ Legacys and Outbacks. I used to follow it quite a bit when I owned my 2012 Legacy CVT. In regards to fuel economy on my 2016 Forester, I've got ~240mi on the ticker and my avg MPG is 29.1, mostly highway.
 
Joined
Oct 30, 2002
Messages
41,268
Location
Great Lakes
Originally Posted By: JTK
I loved everything about that vehicle aside from the 5spd. Super awkward clutch travel, which made the "feel" of the clutch terrible. The pedal spacing was also an issue for me and was really bad with work or winter boots on.
Sometimes I wonder if manufacturers intentionally mess up their manual setups (or just treat it as an after thought), just so that they can get more people to buy the auto/CVT version instead. How many new cars today still have a great manual trans/clutch setup that's a joy to drive? BMW is another one that's been making their manual setups miserable for years now. They include this evil contraption call CDV (clutch delay valve) which, according to them, is supposed to reduce drivetrain wear, if someone doesn't know how to drive a manual properly. But all those that do know have to suffer with it as it makes clutch engagement unpredictable. Makes you look like you don't know how to drive a stick, even if you do. Luckily the CDV can be easily removed. Still, the extent to which some manufacturers will go to discourage you from getting a stick shift is mind blowing.
 

JTK

Thread starter
Joined
Aug 14, 2003
Messages
13,816
Location
Buffalo, NY
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Sometimes I wonder if manufacturers intentionally mess up their manual setups (or just treat it as an after thought), just so that they can get more people to buy the auto/CVT version instead.
So true. Some aspects of this 5spd were fine. The gate/throw of the shifter for instance. If just a little bit more effort was put into the clutch actuation and pedal placement. I've owned 4 and 5spd pickups, SUVs and other cars that were a joy to drive.
 

emg

Joined
Sep 2, 2014
Messages
613
Location
Canada
Originally Posted By: JTK
I've never read of a Subaru CVT failure and they've been on the road since the intro of the 2010+ Legacys and Outbacks. I used to follow it quite a bit when I owned my 2012 Legacy CVT.
I've heard of several now. Most were due to people draining the CVT fluid and replacing it with normal ATF... that'll wear it out in ~1,000 miles. The other was an XT being driven hard off-road, which turned out to have a defective CVT belt; I think it actually snapped. So far, I haven't heard of one failing that was properly maintained and not defective from the factory.
Quote:
In regards to fuel economy on my 2016 Forester, I've got ~240mi on the ticker and my avg MPG is 29.1, mostly highway.
On a good day, the computer claims I'm getting 45 Canadian mpg on the highway. But that's driving on a flat road around 65mph with no headwind... with such a tall and blocky vehicle, higher speeds or headwinds really trash the mpg.
 

JTK

Thread starter
Joined
Aug 14, 2003
Messages
13,816
Location
Buffalo, NY
Originally Posted By: emg
Quote:
In regards to fuel economy on my 2016 Forester, I've got ~240mi on the ticker and my avg MPG is 29.1, mostly highway.
On a good day, the computer claims I'm getting 45 Canadian mpg on the highway. But that's driving on a flat road around 65mph with no headwind... with such a tall and blocky vehicle, higher speeds or headwinds really trash the mpg.
I hear you. My XV Crosstrek's dash readout would always settle out at ~31mpg average tank/tank, but when I calculated it by hand, it was closer to 29-30mpg. I'll have to wait a bit to get something accurate on the new Forster. Funny thing is, that 29.1mpg average is with mostly my 80mi round-trip work commute that is mostly 75mph with inclines, wind, etc..
 
Joined
Dec 21, 2014
Messages
850
Location
pennsylvania, usa
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: JTK
I loved everything about that vehicle aside from the 5spd. Super awkward clutch travel, which made the "feel" of the clutch terrible. The pedal spacing was also an issue for me and was really bad with work or winter boots on.
Sometimes I wonder if manufacturers intentionally mess up their manual setups (or just treat it as an after thought), just so that they can get more people to buy the auto/CVT version instead. How many new cars today still have a great manual trans/clutch setup that's a joy to drive? BMW is another one that's been making their manual setups miserable for years now. They include this evil contraption call CDV (clutch delay valve) which, according to them, is supposed to reduce drivetrain wear, if someone doesn't know how to drive a manual properly. But all those that do know have to suffer with it as it makes clutch engagement unpredictable. Makes you look like you don't know how to drive a stick, even if you do. Luckily the CDV can be easily removed. Still, the extent to which some manufacturers will go to discourage you from getting a stick shift is mind blowing.
Honda does the same thing with the Civic. My 05 doesn't have the CDV and every shift is buttery smooth and slick at 300k with the original clutch. My 15 has the valve and at first it was the clunkiest stick I ever drove. I must be adapting to it now though, or it to me, because I can now shift it nearly as well as the 05. A lot of civic owners pull the valve too.
 
Joined
Mar 5, 2015
Messages
2,478
Location
Juno Beach FL
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Sometimes I wonder if manufacturers intentionally mess up their manual setups (or just treat it as an after thought), just so that they can get more people to buy the auto/CVT version instead. How many new cars today still have a great manual trans/clutch setup that's a joy to drive?
The manufacturers would rather have just one tranny available as it saves money to just have one set up. The vast majority of American consumers opt for the automatics, and the numbers wanting MT are trending downward. I think they would be happier if everyone wanted a MT since they are simpler systems with less things to go wrong and fewer warranty repairs. But the genie is out of the bottle, and people mostly prefer the automatics. Maybe not true of the population of posters on this board, but overall across the USA that is what they prefer.
 
Joined
Oct 30, 2002
Messages
41,268
Location
Great Lakes
SeaJay, I agree. Although in many other countries, manuals are still selling in very large numbers, so it'll be quite a long time before the manufactures will completely stop making them. But in places like US, having to offer a manual trans for a very small market does become costly... you have to certify it with EPA, you have to teach the techs how to service it, it requires different ECU programming, etc. So the manufacturers are intentionally making you jump through hoops to get one, in hopes of further reducing the sales to the point when they'll be able to say "The market for manuals has disappeared, so we are stopping the sale of manuals altogether. Good day!"
Quote:
But the genie is out of the bottle, and people mostly prefer the automatics.
With me at least, it is not that I prefer an automatic, but I'm kind of forced into getting it these days since the manual options are really restricted and restrictive. Often times only base models will offer the manual trans option, and then you have to special order it, and then put up with a poor implementation of it guarded by all sorts of electronic nannies that just sap all the joy out of driving a manual. It gets to the point where you give up and settle for an automatic instead.
Quote:
but overall across the USA that is what they prefer.
No doubt. For most people, it's an appliance and a tool to get the job done (or to get to/from job), so it should be as simple to operate as possible. Nothing wrong with that either.
 
Joined
Sep 23, 2008
Messages
9,974
Location
Ontario, Canada
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
SeaJay, I agree. Although in many other countries, manuals are still selling in very large numbers, so it'll be quite a long time before the manufactures will completely stop making them. But in places like US, having to offer a manual trans for a very small market does become costly... you have to certify it with EPA, you have to teach the techs how to service it, it requires different ECU programming, etc. So the manufacturers are intentionally making you jump through hoops to get one, in hopes of reducing the sales to the point when they will just say "We see no market for it, so we are stopping the sale of manuals altogether. Good day!"
Quote:
But the genie is out of the bottle, and people mostly prefer the automatics.
With me at least, it is not that I prefer an automatic, but I'm kind of forced to getting it these days since the manual options are really restricted. Often times only base models will offer the manual trans option, and then you have to special order it, and then put up with a poor implementation guarded by all sorts of electronic nannies that just sap all the joy out of driving a manual. It gets to the point where you give up and settle for an automatic.
I don't know how costly making a manual available could really be, compared to say, making a RHD version of a car. They only sell 2.5 million cars per year in the UK in total!(Same as the F150 alone in the US) And they probably have close to 10x as many models and drivetrain combinations available to them, than we can get? Even if a manufacturer only gets a 5% take for a manual in a model here, they still probably sell more manuals than all the rhd versions of that model in the UK...
 
Joined
Oct 30, 2002
Messages
41,268
Location
Great Lakes
Originally Posted By: IndyIan
I don't know how costly making a manual available could really be, compared to say, making a RHD version of a car. They only sell 2.5 million cars per year in the UK in total!(Same as the F150 alone in the US) And they probably have close to 10x as many models and drivetrain combinations available to them, than we can get?
Have you looked at how much new cars cost in Europe? Sure, you can get any setup you want, but it comes at a price. Out here in the US, we are spoiled with low priced cars, but the way to make it possible is to limit options and crank out huge volumes of cars that are essentially the same.
Quote:
Even if a manufacturer only gets a 5% take for a manual in a model here, they still probably sell more manuals than all the rhd versions of that model in the UK...
RHD models aren't just built for UK. They are built for Africa, Asia, Australia...
 
Joined
Sep 23, 2008
Messages
9,974
Location
Ontario, Canada
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: IndyIan
I don't know how costly making a manual available could really be, compared to say, making a RHD version of a car. They only sell 2.5 million cars per year in the UK in total!(Same as the F150 alone in the US) And they probably have close to 10x as many models and drivetrain combinations available to them, than we can get?
Have you looked at how much new cars cost in Europe? Sure, you can get any setup you want, but it comes at a price. Out here in the US, we are spoiled with low priced cars, but the way to make it possible is to limit options and crank out huge volumes of cars that are essentially the same.
Quote:
Even if a manufacturer only gets a 5% take for a manual in a model here, they still probably sell more manuals than all the rhd versions of that model in the UK...
RHD models aren't just built for UK. They are built for Africa, Asia, Australia...
I think though the extra cost of cars is pretty much inline with the extra cost of everything there? Food, gas, property etc. I did compare to the UK as well because they get the same cars as the rest of Europe, and to some extent N.A. Asia and Africa don't seem to get the same cars we do, and they tend to be built there as well. I suppose lots of cars in the UK do come from Japan, but the total of Japan, Aus, NZ and UK yearly sales is still less than 9M compared to N.A. with 18-19M. Also the small European manufactures all seem to still sell cars in the UK(Skoda, Citroen) for 5 digit sales of a model?
 

JTK

Thread starter
Joined
Aug 14, 2003
Messages
13,816
Location
Buffalo, NY
Averaged 29.8 mpg out of the second tank of fuel on the new Forester (calculated by hand). The dash computer indicated 30.6 mpg. Not too shabby for a brick shaped, reasonably high off the ground AWD. Much of the diving was ~60-72mph highway travel.
 
Last edited:

emg

Joined
Sep 2, 2014
Messages
613
Location
Canada
Originally Posted By: IndyIan
I think though the extra cost of cars is pretty much inline with the extra cost of everything there? Food, gas, property etc.
Pretty much. In my experience, Britain is a ripoff for anything you can't easily import; when I lived there, electronics wasn't much more expensive than the rest of the world (aside from the 20% sales tax), because you could just go to your favourite foreign electronics website and order exactly the same thing from them. Cars... well, the closest equivalent to our Forester cost 50% more in the UK. The other thing is that cars depreciated much faster there than in North America, so you pay lot for a new one, and lose most of that when you sell it. Probably dates back to the days when the body would fall apart in five years because of all the salt on the roads in the winter rusting out the barely-protected steel.
 

JTK

Thread starter
Joined
Aug 14, 2003
Messages
13,816
Location
Buffalo, NY
Bringing an oldie thread back here, but I had clocked a few hundred miles in my sister in law's 2015-16 Forester with the 6spd manual transmission. I found it to be more pleasant to drive than my 5spd XV Crosstrek for sure. Nothing I'd want to specifically own, but for the right deal..
 

emg

Joined
Sep 2, 2014
Messages
613
Location
Canada
Originally Posted by linuxology
Can someone post on their experience with the Subaru Forester Manual?
Haven't driven one, but the 2016 manuals are significantly more likely to burn oil than the CVTs. Not that it's particularly likely with either, because they fixed most of the problems by 2014, but it is something to be aware of.
 

Ws6

Joined
Mar 7, 2008
Messages
4,172
Location
South Central US
Originally Posted by emg
Originally Posted by JTK
I've never read of a Subaru CVT failure and they've been on the road since the intro of the 2010+ Legacys and Outbacks. I used to follow it quite a bit when I owned my 2012 Legacy CVT.
I've heard of several now. Most were due to people draining the CVT fluid and replacing it with normal ATF... that'll wear it out in ~1,000 miles. The other was an XT being driven hard off-road, which turned out to have a defective CVT belt; I think it actually snapped. So far, I haven't heard of one failing that was properly maintained and not defective from the factory.
Quote
In regards to fuel economy on my 2016 Forester, I've got ~240mi on the ticker and my avg MPG is 29.1, mostly highway.
On a good day, the computer claims I'm getting 45 Canadian mpg on the highway. But that's driving on a flat road around 65mph with no headwind... with such a tall and blocky vehicle, higher speeds or headwinds really trash the mpg.
A friend of mine had his AC and cvt die in his 2.0Xt. I believe it was a 2013 or 2015 model. I cant remember. It happened at 89k miles (both). Traded it in for an MB. He said it needed about 4500 in work so he dumped it.
 
Top