CR says newer Forester models are worse than older ones

Consumer Reports article on Forester (Drive Test section) says that older models of Forester were better (in terms of drivability) than the most recent one. Does anybody know why such change: usually newer models tend to be better than older ones? Will Subaru fix these problems?

Boris

Reply to
Boris
Loading thread data ...

I never drove an 'older' Forester, but the loaner I had frm the dealer seemed OK - maybe a little too much body roll, but OK. The other time I had a loaner, it was an '06 outback which I feel had poorer internal ergonomica that my wife's '03 OBW

Carl

Reply to
Carl 1 Lucky Texan

I think it has to do with the new "'drive by wire" system. Manufactures have been tweaking the DBW system for several years now in an attempt to make it feel as a mechanical linkage. I drive a 2000 Forester (old) and just drove a 2006. I perceive the newer system as feeling different but, not better or worse. The new system does pay off in a more efficient system with respect to vehicle efficiency. JM observations.

Reply to
Edward Hayes

I assume you're referr "The Forester is fairly nimble, though less so than before the 2006 freshening. The steering is light and and lacks the earlier model's feedback and precision."

In other words, I wouldn't say "CR says newer Forester models are worse than older ones." The only difference is that CR doesn't like the newer steering feel. I agree with the other poster in this thread that the change in the steering feel is probably due to newer electrical/electronic steering controls. CR has criticized the steering feel in several cars from different brands that have the newer electrical/electronic steering controls. But it's not a big deal and obviously hasn't stopped CR from recommending those cars.

I haven't driven an older Forester recently, so I can't make a comparison, but recently drove a 2006 Forester briefly, and it seemed fine to me.

BTW, the Forester is still among CR's recommended small SUVs, as you can see on page 55 of the same issue. The top-rated small SUVs in CR are the:

1) Toyota RAV4 Limited V6 2) Toyota RAV4 base 4-cyl. 3) Honda CR-V EX 4) Subaru Forester X

I assume you could find all this info on CR's web site, although you may need to subscribe to get all the content:

formatting link

If anyone wants to read the July issue, I think it's on newsstands now. You could probably also find it at any U.S. college or public library.

By the way, I'm going to test drive some new cars today. Have already tried the CR-V, and even though it's based on the Civic, it has that high, pickup/SUV feel I don't like. I prefer the more car-like feel of the Subarus, which I think I'll like better for long road trips. I'll probably drive some Subarus (Forester, Legacy wagon, Legacy Outback wagain) again today and also the Toyota Matrix and RAV4.

But I could probably be happy with any of the above cars from Honda, Subaru, or Toyota. The Matrix offers the best EPA MPG.

Reply to
neilnewsgroups

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Better???? Better how? Rant mode on. There is more and more electronic crap in the drivetrain. The latest Lexuses ISx50 got to the point where the steering input can be overridden. Customers are made to believe that new cars are somehow "better" by the brilliant minds in the marketing departments of the car makers.

Look at long test report for Acura RL long test drive on Car and Driver, look for the list of recalls for Prius. These two models in particular are much, much worse than American cars. And yet there is no shortage of idiots bringing their money to Toyota. Because the marketroids have successfully built brand loyalty and now it matters less and less how crappy a car you'd come up with, because due to the inertia (call is mass psychosis) people would buy that gabage anyway. Why not? It comes from a company known for its commitment to "quality".

Of course not all American consumers are gullible idiots. Some people would buy a Catarham kit for $70k US even though it's 50+ year old technology. Because it works. And because brilliant engineering works sometimes survive for a long, long time despite the bastardization efforts by the very smart people who are trying to move the money out of your pockets into the coffers of their corporations. Rant mode off.

Reply to
Body Roll

I looked at american models on CR...couldn't find anything that suits my needs. In particular, I read about Cadillac SRX...but it's huge, thirsty on gas (15 mpg in city), and has dismal reliability record (according to CR).

I once worked for a guy (it was ~1990) who was part of a team (American) that invented VCR...needless to say that most VCRs were sold by japanese companies subsequently. Boris

Reply to
Boris

Forester has mediocre factory-installed tyres (this was discussed on this NG many times). At 20K dealer told me to install new tyres...so I got Firestone Affinity LH

30...after that the car became more agile on the road...but when driving on snow and ice in ski areas they were pretty good too.

Boris

Reply to
Boris

Here in SF Bay Area there was a bad accident last winter when it was snowing on Hwy 101 just north of the city. Cars were getting from a tunnel (having good speed) right into mini-show storm,...road was covered with melting snow..there were injuries and fatalities. I consider AWD as an extra safety measure...but not sure if sophisticated AWD systems geared toward saving every 1/10-th of gallon of gas are as safe as simpler systems: when both frotnt and rear weels are engaged ~50/50 all the time.

Boris

Reply to
Boris

I'm a bit suspicious about RAV4 V6. Top of the line trim costs

Reply to
Boris

We bought a 2006 Forester a few months ago after considering competitive cars. I agree with CR about the steering in the Forester; it makes me a little nervous because it seems, as they say, too light. But that's my only real complaint about the car. In test drives and reading various reviews, we still liked the Forester better than the RAV-4 and the Honda CRX. I was initially leaning towards the Matrix but just sitting inside it, the interior seemed so cheap and chintzy I changed my mind. My sister has one and she likes it except for the low clearance--and that's in California where they don't get much snow.

In particular I don't like the back-door mounted spare tires on the Toyota and the Honda. These are all good cars and I think choosing among them is more a matter of personal preference. And timing. If we'd waited a few more months for the 2007 Foresters, I could have gotten a much prettier shade of blue.

Reply to
yngver

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.