TRD OR vs Subaru Forester

Register to hide this ad
At one time we looked into Subaru. Liked Eyesight. Low dependability and CVT transmission, no thanks. They are popular in Seattle.
 
My wife's Outback has KO2s, a lift, and skid plates. With Subaru's AWD and the safety stuff, it's like a spaceship. I'll just say I'm glad she's driving it and it's stupid fun on basic offroad stuff and in the snow. We've had 3 Subarus in the family for the last 7 years and no dependability issues.
 
I've driven the newer Outbacks and Foresters and while they were nice I definitely didn't like either more than the 4Runner. Honestly doesn't feel like a good comparison, they're more in the Highlander category.

wcjeep said:
At one time we looked into Subaru. Liked Eyesight. Low dependability and CVT transmission, no thanks. They are popular in Seattle.
Click to expand...



CVT I agree on, we have a Crosstrek as well and it's the part I like the least. Don't mind the lack of shifting but it's super late and goes from nothing to everything after a good delay. But low dependability? Subarus are some of the longest running vehicles on the road. That one I don't get.
 
I think Subaru made huge mistakes in the new Forrester by sticking with cvt and 4 cylinder without turbo. It would have been a top choice to go with my 4r if they kept the 2.0T and threw in a true auto or manual. I think the new Honda Passport will take away some of the Forrester sales because of the 6 cylinder and auto transmission.
 
Last edited:
We have two foresters, but they have a traditional auto. Reliability, aside from oil leaks from head gasket has been super. We had to look hard to avoid the CVT models.

They are quite a capable and easy to drive. I’ll jump into one instead of the My 4R or wife’s LX570.
 
I drove a 05 Legacy GT wagon (5spd) for 13 years. I loved that car. Last year I traded her in for my 4Runner. I love that car...
nqkRXhql.jpg
 
Last edited:
jimmynotjim said:
I've driven the newer Outbacks and Foresters and while they were nice I definitely didn't like either more than the 4Runner. Honestly doesn't feel like a good comparison, they're more in the Highlander category.



CVT I agree on, we have a Crosstrek as well and it's the part I like the least. Don't mind the lack of shifting but it's super late and goes from nothing to everything after a good delay. But low dependability? Subarus are some of the longest running vehicles on the road. That one I don't get.
Click to expand...

They are absolutely not the longest running vehicle on the road. While many aspects of the cars are durable the engines are the worst. I have been into Subaru STi and forrester's since 2004. The STi after 2006 has to be the least durable engine on the road. Also the forrester's 2.5.

Just last night driving through the local dealership another STi wagon was having engine out service.

They have been changing the engines lately but a few years ago the 2.0 was pretty bad as well. Two cylinder heads and gaskets not to mention timing belts are such stupid features. Mitsubishi and Toyota have timing belts but they are much easier to service. My 2003 galant will outlast 10 subaru's and I take it down the gnarliest roads
 
I gave a ride once to a couple in a broke down Subaru on a Colorado Jeep trail. There is no comparison between the two vehicles. Subaru's are good to drive to the ski resort or light off-roading if you are concerned about gas mileage.
 
Had a 17 XT. Before driving the XT we test drove a CRV, RAV4 and CX5, forester 4cyl. The XT was so much quicker and planted on the road than the other 3 CUV/SUVs. Loved the fish bowl visibility. Plenty of power for mountain passes. No issues with Snow and light off-roading (high clearance, heavy washboard roads). The forester definitely felt much more capable once I moved from stock tires to the new geolanders.

Cons and why I moved to a TRD OR:
CVT!!!!! Like everyone else said, SUCKS. Good enough for mall cruiser people
Premium Gas only, small tank
Driver seat uncomfortable for long drives and barely enough space for a 6’2 person.
Turbo lag.
Interior outdated for a “high end” trim.
Small Things just started failing at 45k miles.

If the XT was still available I would still recommend it over a CRV, CX5 or RAV4. Especially if you live in the mountains. Just make sure to get the extended warranty....

IMO a 4Runner is in a different league and can’t be compared to a forester.
 
My fiancee has a 17 Forester and I have a 17 4Runner, I definitely prefer my 4Runner but I've owned 4Runners for almost 15 years. Her Forester is a nice grocery getter and gets better gas mileage than my T4R, but I wish she would have gotten the turbo
 
Orc said:
They are absolutely not the longest running vehicle on the road. While many aspects of the cars are durable the engines are the worst. I have been into Subaru STi and forrester's since 2004. The STi after 2006 has to be the least durable engine on the road. Also the forrester's 2.5.

Just last night driving through the local dealership another STi wagon was having engine out service.

They have been changing the engines lately but a few years ago the 2.0 was pretty bad as well. Two cylinder heads and gaskets not to mention timing belts are such stupid features. Mitsubishi and Toyota have timing belts but they are much easier to service. My 2003 galant will outlast 10 subaru's and I take it down the gnarliest roads
Click to expand...

Yeah I was actually looking at WRX STIs before I got my runner and I stayed away because of all the negativity surrounding the new EJ25 engine
 
I think the foresters are remarkably capable. I have an ongoing argument on Pirate regarding whether a Forester is more capable than a Mahindra Roxor. I have no doubt whatsoever that a Forester will absolutely embarrass a Roxor in the dirt. Roxors are open differentials on both ends. Shouldn't even be close. AND the kicker is that a forester is CHEAPER!! brand new than the Roxor. I'm still waiting for a roxor to show up as a trade in at my friend's powersports shop so we can take it out and compare. I'll probably rent a forester for a day. I'll be sure to video tape it.

I Forester is really no match for a 4Runner in the extreme, but it's pretty solidly in Jeep GC territory.

I'm really curious to see how the new RAV4 does. They've added MTS/ATRAC to the new Rav as a standard feature. Supposedly the center diff has a full lock dog clutch so you can actually get damn near the same drive performance as the non TRD model 4Runners. But of course a lot less durable and less ground clearance. With some skid plates and minor suspension mods you could have a reasonably capable overlander that's perfectly at home on all the "overland" trails and gets 30+mpg.
 
Jetboy said:
I think the foresters are remarkably capable. I have an ongoing argument on Pirate regarding whether a Forester is more capable than a Mahindra Roxor. I have no doubt whatsoever that a Forester will absolutely embarrass a Roxor in the dirt. Roxors are open differentials on both ends. Shouldn't even be close. AND the kicker is that a forester is CHEAPER!! brand new than the Roxor. I'm still waiting for a roxor to show up as a trade in at my friend's powersports shop so we can take it out and compare. I'll probably rent a forester for a day. I'll be sure to video tape it.

I Forester is really no match for a 4Runner in the extreme, but it's pretty solidly in Jeep GC territory.

I'm really curious to see how the new RAV4 does. They've added MTS/ATRAC to the new Rav as a standard feature. Supposedly the center diff has a full lock dog clutch so you can actually get damn near the same drive performance as the non TRD model 4Runners. But of course a lot less durable and less ground clearance. With some skid plates and minor suspension mods you could have a reasonably capable overlander that's perfectly at home on all the "overland" trails and gets 30+mpg.
Click to expand...

As much as I really hated the engine for guzzling so much oil, where Subaru really earns its merits is in the snow. Seen a few videos of double digit inches of snow where the Subarus are the only vehicles churning along, even compared to 4Runners and Wranglers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 344 (members: 0, guests: 344)

Forum statistics

Threads
278,310
Messages
3,554,079
Members
248,016
Latest member
Advally Service

Share this page

Trending content

Back
Top