|
|
|
Comment |
Sorted by
Date Written |
Re: Nice review (Reply to this comment)
by mkaresh,  in Cars & Motorsports
Last time I checked the Forester did actually have as much ground clearance as many SUVs, about 8 inches, vs. 5 or so for many cars. Many current SUVs are built on car platforms.
To qualify as a heavy truck, which is the classification you're probably thinking of, a vehicle must weigh a certain amount. The Forester is not close to that amount, but then neither are most SUVs.
|
Dec 21 '06
6:22 am PST
|
|
Nice review (Reply to this comment)
by bettega
One nit I would like to pick is that the forester is not an SUV.
It is marketed as one, however according to federal regulations it does not meet certain criteria including ground clearance and a few other factors I am forgetting right now.
A glance at the spec plates on the driver's side door reveals the text "passenger vehicle". Also notice that the license plates (at least in my state, I don't know about yours) are for "passenger" and not "commercial". I wouldn't even go to call it a "crossover" because the chassis is pure impreza with boxier and more practical styling.
Yes, the manual is a bit of a chore to shift, but combined with the motor/gearing/AWD is more fun than any mortal should be allowed to have! It's fun to overtake just about any car in those tight 2-1 lane merges... tee hee!
I wish it had tighter handling, but it does amazing around low speed curves
Enjoy the protege-5 (and its nimble handling)
Bettega
|
Dec 20 '06
6:11 pm PST
|
|
Re: Again good review... (Reply to this comment)
by mkaresh, in Cars & Motorsports
You won't find me buying an SUV.
As for "stylish," well, maybe bits fo the interior.
|
Nov 26 '03
4:18 am PST
|
|
Again good review... (Reply to this comment)
by tugttw
So, I recently purchased one of these babies myself, before reading this review, and now, reading it is very interesting.
Personally, all your concerns about this not being an SUV are ok for me... Just remember, this is a Subaru! I think that overall, they have made a very peppy, stylish vehicle! If you like an SUV, go ahead and get one of those gas guzzling things, if you want a Subaru, this is definitely one to consider.
|
Nov 25 '03
5:12 pm PST
|
|
Re: Handling (Reply to this comment)
by mkaresh, in Cars & Motorsports
Thanks for the info, discouraging though it may be. With less sticky tires the lean is less evident. The best solution might be a tire in between the two.
|
Sep 17 '03
7:03 am PDT
|
|
Handling (Reply to this comment)
by tbone2k
I drove an XT with the option 17" tires from a WRX and it solved the sliding issue and replaced it with a huge amount of body lean.
Bottom line: Its fast in a straight line, but not meant for handling. However, if I remember it also has class-leading brakes. So its a good vehicle all around and the turbo engine could make up for the lack of a V6 offered by competitors.
|
Sep 16 '03
10:30 pm PDT
|
|
Re: MPG numbers (Reply to this comment)
by mkaresh, in Cars & Motorsports
According to the EPA, yes. I've noticed this effect often with powerful engines. Most likely it's an artifact of the EPA test cycle combined with differences in gear ratios.
|
Sep 12 '03
7:05 am PDT
|
|
MPG numbers (Reply to this comment)
by pvreditor,  in Cars & Motorsports
Nice review as always, Michael. I do have a question about the MPG number that you cite... does the this Forester actually get slightly better gas mileage with the automatic transmission?
--Bob
|
Sep 12 '03
6:06 am PDT
|
|
Re: hmmm... (Reply to this comment)
by mkaresh, in Cars & Motorsports
Those tall all-wheel-drive wagons would be precursors. They were before their time, but people who owned them loved them.
The cargo area is smaller than others in the class. I'll check what I've written to make sure this is clear. Thanks for the reminder.
|
Sep 11 '03
2:01 pm PDT
|
|
hmmm... (Reply to this comment)
by scmrak, in Cars & Motorsports
would the early-80s Toyota Celica and Honda Civic wagons be fore-runners to this class, I wonder?
One thing I didn't like about the Forester when shopping for a new car is what I considered a small cargo space. The rear seat on the 2002 folded flat and that's all (IIRC - it's been a while), which was far less versatile than the CR-V's tumbling seats or the RAV-4's removables. Since we got the second dog (which gives us 200 pounds of Labrador) not long after getting the CR-V, I'm glad we opted for that model since it has the largest cargo space of the three.
As always, a superb job.
R
|
Sep 11 '03
12:29 pm PDT
|
|
I just test drove one of these on Tuesday (Reply to this comment)
by marytara
I currently am driving a Legacy Outback wagon and was thinking of the Forrester next time around. The test drive was just "ok" though so looks like I'm sticking with my Outback at least for a while longer.
Great review,
~MaryTara
|
Sep 11 '03
10:53 am PDT
|
|
|
|
