My Forester beats BMW Z4, 350Z, S2000, RX8, SLK...

Subaru Forester 2.5 XT's 0-60 time of 5.3 seconds ties Porsche Boxster S and is better than that of most other sports cars :-

BMW Z4 (5.5) Honda S2000 (5.7) Mazda RX8 (6.4) Mercedes Benz SLK (6.9) Mustang GT (6.1) Nissan 350Z (5.4)

Although the Forester doesn't turn corners as fast as these sports cars it can probably turn faster than most (if not all) other SUV's and its 64 cuft of cargo space is very important for me.

Reply to
noswen
Loading thread data ...

formatting link

6.4 for manual to 100 km/h where did manage to squeeze a full second off this?

Reply to
Jiz

If only it looked half as cool as any of the other cars you mentioned. TG

Reply to
TG

According to

formatting link
ACCELERATION (Seconds) Zero to 30 mph: 1.3

40 mph: 2.6 50 mph: 3.6 60 mph: 5.3 70 mph: 6.9 80 mph: 9.2 90 mph: 11.8 100 mph: 15.0 110 mph: 19.5 120 mph: 26.7

"The force-fed flat-four's combination of torque, gearing, and weight will get you a blazing 0-to-60 time of 5.3 seconds and a quarter-mile of 13.8 seconds at 97 mph, just 0.3 second slower than an $89,665 Porsche Cayenne Turbo".

The U.S. versi>

formatting link

Reply to
noswen

Hi,

0-60 > Subaru Forester 2.5 XT's 0-60 time of 5.3 seconds ties
Reply to
Tony Hwang

Yeah, I wouldn't bet on the better drivers thing. Have you seen how people in the states drive? Tonyrama

Reply to
tonyrama

Reply to
Tony Hwang

Probably a true story, I've driven one, and they're pretty darn quick; subjectively it felt as fast as my WRX! I'd be a bit nervous stuffing the Forester into a turn slideways, tho! At least on pavement; the NA Forester is a blast on a dirt road. The Ms. yells at me every time I drive hers. ("Slow Down; It's not a race car!" "Sweetheart, they're _all_ race cars . . ." ;-)

BTW, that name Larry Ganz seems awfully familiar, can't place it tho.

ByeBye! S.

Steve Jernigan KG0MB Laboratory Manager Microelectronics Research University of Colorado (719) 262-3101

Reply to
S

The story is very true.. I have a WRX, I've driven a 2004 Forester XT. The Forester is faster than the WRX, hands down.. that 2.5 has great low-end that makes all the difference. I would have bought one, but didn't want anything that looked even close to a SUV..

I'm holding out for the 2005 legacy wagon, which should be even faster.

S wrote:

Reply to
<bjj

The XT is like a jet plane taking off. Reminds me of 60's V-8s. We almost bought the XT, but went for the OBW instead. The XT (even the premium package) interior just wasn't all that nice, and it wasn't very comfy, either. Plus the vehicle is, er, aesthetically challenged.

Reply to
Alan

Yeah, you're right. I had to look around extra to find a manual shift Subie when I bought mine. I heard it described as the difference between driving and steering.

Minds don't even know how to replace tire.

Judging by the pictures of that car, I'd say they're lucky to be alive. If I ever hit a wall at 80 MPH with my car, I can only hope I wouldn't feel a thing.

Tonyrama

Reply to
tonyrama

I have an XT and, though I haven't tried to see what it will really do (still breaking in the engine, and owner's manual says nothing above

4K RPM), I can tell: this thing is (will be) fast.

Nevertheless, I find the Motor Trend number (5.3 to 60 MPH, manual trans) a bit hard to believe. Somewhere in the owner's manual or other docs that came with my car I saw 6.1 stated, though I don't recall whether stick or auto trans.

As for aesthetics, I find the funky look appealing. I love sitting up a bit high, but not SUV-high. The seats are firm but very comfortable. All in all, a marvelous car.

HW

Reply to
H. Whelply

The fact that no one expects a car looking like the Forester to be fast suggests the possibility of many a fun time at traffic lights, looking in my rearview mirror at mouths hanging open in the cars behind me.

Also, cops won't expect a small "cute-ute" SUV to be fast. They'll figure their radars need recalibrating, or concentrate on the S2000s and Boxters and similar cars. The Forester is a Q-ship! Further, mine's white. No one expects a white car to be fast.

HW

Reply to
H. Whelply

The numbers I posted were from Car & Driver web site at

formatting link
But I've found another site which shows a 0-60 time of

5.25 seconds for the Forester 2.5 XT.

formatting link
This site also shows a 0-60 time of 6.12 seconds for the 2003 Porsche Boxster and 5.6 seconds for the 2003 Boxster S.

formatting link
I think I've made the right decision not to buy a Boxster :-)

snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com (H. Whelply) wrote:

Reply to
noswen

The Mitsubishi Airtrek Turbo is pretty similar to the Forester and about as fast.

formatting link

-- Bruce

Reply to
Bruce Hoult

Reply to
Edward Hayes

Never heard of it. Perhaps Mitsubishi sells that model in the US under another model name. Still, I've not been aware that they have a similar product.

Reply to
H. Whelply

I don't know about the US. A quick browse on Google shows reviews and ads in other countries such as the UK and Malaysia and Australia (as the "Outlander"). Here's a review from Malaysia, saying it's a cheap way to get near EVO levels of performance:

formatting link

Here's a standard Jeremy Clarkson rant, in which he says that it's great, but you're probably better off getting either an EVO or else a Turbo Forester ("slightly more practical, even more fun, and more than £2,000 cheaper"). But definitely in the same ballpark...

formatting link
Oh, and here is Clarkson on EVO vs STI:

formatting link

-- Bruce

Reply to
Bruce Hoult

It will look plenty cool as it passes these cars, I can just imagine the S2000/Z4/350Z owners faces turning white as they get beat to 60mph by an SUV....priceless. I get that same look of disbelief in my Toyota RAV4 that has been fitted with an AVO turbo & water/air intercooler, they never expect anyone in a RAV4 to pull from them, its quite fun.

Reply to
WRXtreme

Ah! The Outlander! What's available in the States under that label is overpriced and underpowered (would you believe 140 HP?!). Wouldn't even have considered it.

formatting link

Reply to
H. Whelply

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.