Forester vs Cruiser

NG might recall a while back that a PT Cruiser killed my '98 Forester. Needing a rental while insurance settled up, I got a Neon which I thought was a POS. Understand that the base car of the PT Cruiser is a Neon. I, too, think PT's look neat but would not buy one. For the price, why not get a 23nd Forester - an '03 replaced my '98. Frank

I actually do have experience driving both, but don't consider them even close to comparable. You know the Forester, the Cruiser is basically a small van, which I found not near as comfortable, less room up front, or maybe the room just is not as well used, handling not as good, less precise, and less power in comparison. (The Cruiser is a friend's, I should say it's proved reliable for him.)

Larry Van Wormer

"Edward Hayes" wrote in news:3VAJc.259464$ snipped-for-privacy@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net:

I have a '03 Impreza Wagon and recently drove a brand new rental '04 PT Cruiser for a week from Vancouver to Port Townsend and back. It's not my first experience with the PT cruiser as I rented one a year ago for a similar type trip. I have to say I was fairly impressed with the PT. Even with 4 passengers and luggage (there is a lot of room and it's quite versatile) it was reasonably peppy on the highway. I found it to be comfortable and roomy and had no rattles or other annoyances. Some of the switches are in unusual places and I think the billiard ball shifter is a bit much but I would certainly say take one for a spin. Of course it doesn't have AWD. You might want to look at the new Dodge Magnum which will be offering AWD.

The PT Cruiser feels a lot flimsier and cheaper in comparison, for what it's worth. The novel body style tries to make you forget that you're in a glorified Neon. The fit/finish won't compare to your Forester.

I have a buddy who rushed out and got one of these when they were new and paid over $20k for it. He took one ride in my Outback and boy did he regret his decision. He was kinda manic though that the PT was the only car with a hatchback that didn't have rear strut towers constraining the cargo floor width (keyboard players can be strange folks).

Best Regards,

-- Todd H.

2001 Legacy Outback Wagon, 2.5L H-4 Chicago, Illinois USA

I'm nowhere near being in the market for a new or newer car yet, but until I saw the Magnum I never thought that I'd even think of buying another American car. I love wagons, dislike trucks, and also dislike (most) vehicles that are produced in such massive volume that everybody and their brother seems to have one, or even two. That rules out most of the domestic wagon choices, but that new Magnum is appealing in so many ways. Since the Magnum seems to have sidestepped the frenzy that surrounded the PT Cruiser I don't think it will be even half as popular, which is probably bad for Daimler-Chrysler but good for someone such as myself. ;)

Of course, if I was getting a 2nd car myself, I'd probably just look around for an old hearse. Now that's a unique choice!

-Matt

I have a friend that drives a cruiser. They only get about 16mpg on a V-6 engine. Overall they are smaller than a Forester as well.

I have a 2004 Cruiser and my wife has a 2000 Forester, so I think I can make a comparison...

The Subaru wins on power, especially low-end torque. The 2.4 in the PT likes to rev, though, so it's not bad with a stick shift. PT is quieter, too. The PT wins on legroom, front and rear, and both have close to the headrtoom of a convertible. I would probably prefer the seats in the Forester if I fit better... I'm 6'2 with long legs.

Subaru will probaly outlast the PT, though who knows? Forester has had no problems in 60,000 miles except O2 sensor, PT is too new for me to judge.

Tom Bavis

The turbo unit in the GT is Mitsubishi. But the 2.4L DOHC is assembled in Mexico by Chrysler. It's used in the Mexico Stratus SE & R/T, as well as the Mexico Chrysler Cirrus sedan.

What you're probably thinking of is the 2.4L engine used in the US Dodge Stratus coupe and the Chrysler Sebring coupe. Different engine though, it's a SOHC. These are the two vehicles that Mitsubishi makes engines for, NOT the PT/GT Cruiser or Dodge SRT-4.

from: srtforums.com

My wife's car is a PT and we have a 90 Legacy with 266K miles. The 2.2 at that mileage still has more poop than the PT. Handling for the PT is not nearly as good as the Legacy wagon although better than some. PT feels topheavy although it stiffens up. Ride is choppier. Not a bad package but. It has been reliable. You might try the turbo PT.

Dick

STAY AWAY FROM THE PT CRUSIER !!!!!!!

My boss has one and it's been in the shop every other month for one problem or another. (mostly cooling or HVAC issues) PTC's are JUNK!

the pt only has a 4 cyl engine, and my turbo runs like snot : )

I have a turbo pt cruiser GT, it's fast handles well, and I haven't had any problems with the car (yet?) but I have been eying the STi

The most common misconception about the PT Cruiser is that it's built on the Neon chasis. It is not. The original prototype displayed in car shows was built on a Neon chasis, but when it went in to production they developed a new chasis (actually, a unibody).

Also, if you are going to compare a PT Cruiser to a Forrester, then you should compare the PT Cruiser GT to the Forrester since those prices are more comparable. The GT has a nice tight suspension, anti-lock brakes, traction control, and a powerful 215 HP turbo charged engine which will leave the Forrester in the dust. And it's not just a bolt-on turbo. the engine is beefed up where needed, with oil sprayers and intercooler. It will out accelerate a a 1993 Jaguar XJS Coupe, a

1989 Porsche 944 and a 1967 Ford V8 Mustang.

Although it's 8 inches shorter than a Nissan Sentra (169 vs 177 inches), "Its 121.5 cubic feet of interior volume is comparable to that of large cars such as the Mercedes-Benz S-Class or Lincoln Town Car."

The maximum cargo capacity of 64.2 cu. ft. is greater than some SUVs, such as the Chevy Blazer (60.6 CF) Mitsubishi Outlander (60.3 CF), Saturn Vue (63.8 CF), Suzuki Grand Vitara (50.2 CF).

Plenty of room for cargo. You can fit a load of 8 foot long 2X4s in it and still close the hatch. Weak points of the PT Cruiser: turning radius and gas mileage.

Get lost - you're comparing FWD with AWD ;( Frank BTW PT Cruiser destroyed my '98 Forester in head-on accident. I got slight bruise. Woman driver was hospitalized.

...and it is built by Chrysler...same plastic--different names. And no sense even discussing horrible resale/trade value of most Chrysler products.

The low resale value can be a plus if you're buying used (like I did). People haven't come to realize that Chrysler quality has vastly improved in recent years. You can take advantage of this misconception by spending a lot less for a very reliable used car.

Read any consumer guide report and you will see that the PT Cruiser ranks among the best Japanese. If you want to buy new and sell every few years, then by all means, Japanese is the way to go. If you want to buy used, I'd go with a well rated American that has been unfairly depretiated.

At Edmunds, the consumer rating for a 2004 PT Cruiser is 9.2, the rating for the Forrester is 9.1.

PT Cruiser has a powertrain warranty of 7 years and 84,000 miles, Subaru has a 5 year 60,000 miles powertrain warranty.

Well you might check your numbers. The Forester XT will put a spankin' on a PT Cruiser GT. The 2003 GT runs 7.2 seconds for the

0-60 and 15.7 seconds in the 1/4 mile. The Forester runs a sub-6 second 0-60 and a 1/4 mile time of 13.8. Don't get me wrong, the PT Cruiser GT is not your mom's station wagon. But, it lacks the power and amenities of the the Forester X. The AWD in the Subaru is a big selling feature for me. I won't own a vehicle that is not AWD or 4WD. BlueSTi "Scary-Fast"