What Subaru , would you pick for offroad us?
- Thread starter slow2run
- Start date
E.J.
Explorer
That is beautiful.
Not to tread jack, but ive been looking at both the outback and the forester. Not know much about either. My needs are pretty basic and i believe they both fit me well. Neither would be driven offroad other than dirt.
Daily driver.
Grocery getter.
Camping gear hauler. Established camp grounds.
Mtn bike hauler.
Needs to have Awd or 4wd for my commute to work. Both do
I like the 05+ look on the outback and im trying to find one within my price range. Im not afraid to buy higher mileage.
The foresters I like the 07+ look i think.
Im contemplating trading my High payment f150 for a smaller payment in hopes of saving more money a month and yielding a quicker pay off. Im afraid to loose the bed of a pick up that I dont use all that often.
My thinking is with money I save ill just buy a beater yard truck or a small trailer.
Daily driver.
Grocery getter.
Camping gear hauler. Established camp grounds.
Mtn bike hauler.
Needs to have Awd or 4wd for my commute to work. Both do
I like the 05+ look on the outback and im trying to find one within my price range. Im not afraid to buy higher mileage.
The foresters I like the 07+ look i think.
Im contemplating trading my High payment f150 for a smaller payment in hopes of saving more money a month and yielding a quicker pay off. Im afraid to loose the bed of a pick up that I dont use all that often.
My thinking is with money I save ill just buy a beater yard truck or a small trailer.
BBerry4430
New member
I went the utility trailer route. It's perfect. Get a good class 3 hitch for it (I have a Curt, and am very pleased), and you'll have the best of all worlds. Good gas mileage and maneuverability, utility when needed. I have a 2010 Forester that I love dearly. I've genuinely wheeled it and it did way better than I had any right to expect. I also owned an 05 Outback XT and loved that as well. Sold it like a moron years ago.
Dranged
Coffee-Chocolate
This is right in my same vein.
It depends if you have (young) kids. I have 2 under 4 and the car seat variable was critical. I made a spreadsheet comparing dimensions of front and rear seat space, cargo room behind rear seat, and with seats folder down as well as comparing towing capacity and power/weight ratios with NA engines and turbos. The gen 3 OB has more cargo volume behind rear seat of all foresters (and more total cargo volume than gen 2 foresters 03-08), BUT the newest forester has a scosh more total cargo volume (seats folded down), b/c its taller.
I had thought the forester (gen 2, '03-'08) was the perfect car but then car seats eat up the back. Now I think a gen 3 OB (05-09) is ideal.
More rear seat space and a large back seat, low roof line for roof racks (baskets, bikes, box, etc.). I lean towards the 08-09 b/c I like the grill redesign, but I'm liking the 05-07 now more too (trim line limited). The H-6 and turbos got a 5-speed auto (auto is better for real off-roading), but I still prefer a stick (50/50 torque split front/rear off the line). Both my current Subarus are stick (95 legacy, 03 Outback Sport)
I do now like the 09 and newer foresters. I was a bit of a stodger about it when they first came out, "why does everything have to get bigger and bigger?!" However, having set foot in a friend's 09, I think the newer foresters are great. I DO NOT and will not be sold on the '10 and newer OBs though, they're just too big, tipsy, and ugly (same roof line as a minivan and the Tribecca)!!
A Crosstrek, however, is no-kids awesome!! With back seat space of the newer bigger Imprezas (overall same-ish dimensions to my 95 legacy), but with the ground clearance of the newer forester! The now 2.0 liter in the XV on the CVT is a good pairing compared to the newer OB with CVT.
At any rate, my preference/suggestion for your inquiries: A) 08-09 but le$$ go for 06-07 OB (NA 4cyl= 2700# towing, 6cyl 3000+); B) 09+ Forester; C) crosstrek.
(depending on your market) You'd probably be able to get a 60K mile gen 3 OB (05-07) for about $15K.
I hope that's helpful info.
It depends if you have (young) kids. I have 2 under 4 and the car seat variable was critical. I made a spreadsheet comparing dimensions of front and rear seat space, cargo room behind rear seat, and with seats folder down as well as comparing towing capacity and power/weight ratios with NA engines and turbos. The gen 3 OB has more cargo volume behind rear seat of all foresters (and more total cargo volume than gen 2 foresters 03-08), BUT the newest forester has a scosh more total cargo volume (seats folded down), b/c its taller.
I had thought the forester (gen 2, '03-'08) was the perfect car but then car seats eat up the back. Now I think a gen 3 OB (05-09) is ideal.
More rear seat space and a large back seat, low roof line for roof racks (baskets, bikes, box, etc.). I lean towards the 08-09 b/c I like the grill redesign, but I'm liking the 05-07 now more too (trim line limited). The H-6 and turbos got a 5-speed auto (auto is better for real off-roading), but I still prefer a stick (50/50 torque split front/rear off the line). Both my current Subarus are stick (95 legacy, 03 Outback Sport)
I do now like the 09 and newer foresters. I was a bit of a stodger about it when they first came out, "why does everything have to get bigger and bigger?!" However, having set foot in a friend's 09, I think the newer foresters are great. I DO NOT and will not be sold on the '10 and newer OBs though, they're just too big, tipsy, and ugly (same roof line as a minivan and the Tribecca)!!
A Crosstrek, however, is no-kids awesome!! With back seat space of the newer bigger Imprezas (overall same-ish dimensions to my 95 legacy), but with the ground clearance of the newer forester! The now 2.0 liter in the XV on the CVT is a good pairing compared to the newer OB with CVT.
At any rate, my preference/suggestion for your inquiries: A) 08-09 but le$$ go for 06-07 OB (NA 4cyl= 2700# towing, 6cyl 3000+); B) 09+ Forester; C) crosstrek.
(depending on your market) You'd probably be able to get a 60K mile gen 3 OB (05-07) for about $15K.
I hope that's helpful info.
Assuming you are referencing new then I would say a Forester, but recognize that this vehicle is for light to moderate off road use at best. It has great AWD, decent approach and departure angles, but add some good tires!
If an older model, some of the old Loyales with two speed transfer cases went almost any where (often with a few dings or dents) but they are likely impossible to find today. I would suggest you stay with post 2009 Forester, stay light in terms of use ( which is where most folks usually spend a lot of time) and if you can afford, look to the new 2014 model with the enhanced AWD option (X Mode). You will enjoy, but add good tires!
http://www.tflcar.com/2013/04/2014-subaru-forester-off-road-snowy-misadventure-review/
Note: you can access two reviews in the above link.
If an older model, some of the old Loyales with two speed transfer cases went almost any where (often with a few dings or dents) but they are likely impossible to find today. I would suggest you stay with post 2009 Forester, stay light in terms of use ( which is where most folks usually spend a lot of time) and if you can afford, look to the new 2014 model with the enhanced AWD option (X Mode). You will enjoy, but add good tires!
http://www.tflcar.com/2013/04/2014-subaru-forester-off-road-snowy-misadventure-review/
Note: you can access two reviews in the above link.
Last edited:
Dranged
Coffee-Chocolate
Copy GHR in that the 2014 forester is fantastic.
Consumer reports rated another small SUV with the caveat the 2014 Forester hadn't been released, then in the very next issue the 2014 forester blew the rest of the compact SUVs out of the water.
Its also rated at combined city/hwy mileage of 32 MPG I believe, and the twin scroll turbo is also 32 MPG (and I think it may even be a boosted new new, 2 liter toyota-subaru engine).
while a 2014 would give you a car payment, probably not too hefty if you're trading in the p/u.
While the "X" mode does crazy awesome things, its all in a cvt and thus towing drops significantly vs. the 4EAT or 5EAT transmissions.
give and take, so it goes.
Consumer reports rated another small SUV with the caveat the 2014 Forester hadn't been released, then in the very next issue the 2014 forester blew the rest of the compact SUVs out of the water.
Its also rated at combined city/hwy mileage of 32 MPG I believe, and the twin scroll turbo is also 32 MPG (and I think it may even be a boosted new new, 2 liter toyota-subaru engine).
while a 2014 would give you a car payment, probably not too hefty if you're trading in the p/u.
While the "X" mode does crazy awesome things, its all in a cvt and thus towing drops significantly vs. the 4EAT or 5EAT transmissions.
give and take, so it goes.
i had an awd oldsmobile bravada, just an awd jimmy basically. More upscale and awd instead of 4hi and 4 lo.
That awd setup did not handle a lot of slippage. It did wonderfully in the snow and that is what it was made for. It did great on farm roads and stuff where you are not really off roading, just heading somewhere.
What happens is it heats up and has a melt down of some sort. Never read up on it. Owners manual said it was not made for actual off road use, so it just got me where I was going and was not a recreational 4x4.
Tires really made that thing handle mud on farm roads or on paths around farm fields where some 4x4 stuff with all terrain tires were getting stuck.
I do not know if the subaru awd is at all similar to what I am describing above, but it is something to check out.
The other part of the above is to seriously consider what tires you have.
I have seen a locked up 2wd truck go past a 4x4 with all terrains spinning its tires. Depends on terrain being covered. The locked up 2wd could keep a tire on something offering traction and that is all she wrote on that one.
Here in east tn some folks do some silly stuff with vehicles they are about to take to junkyards and a serious set of little mud tires on a fwd car can let that car go places that amaze folks.
It does usually damage the car but the point is tires really do matter a lot.
Something else to consider about having 4x4 lo is that the gearing lets you go slower over obstacles. This generally is easier on the vehicle.
I think the subby stuff has a ton of potential and you can find all kinds of stuff made for it or pics and plans so you can make your own.
But I would really pay attention to protecting the bottom of it as already mentioned and getting power to all 4 wheels and have decent tread on all 4 wheels.
I don't know the constant velocity transmission or whatever they are called so I like something with actual gears. I prefer a manual transmission but an automatic with actual gears comes next I guess.
And then the cvt transmission maybe. I would really want to see how those are doing in rallying and other stuff before I would want one. That and who is going to repair it when I tear it up.
That awd setup did not handle a lot of slippage. It did wonderfully in the snow and that is what it was made for. It did great on farm roads and stuff where you are not really off roading, just heading somewhere.
What happens is it heats up and has a melt down of some sort. Never read up on it. Owners manual said it was not made for actual off road use, so it just got me where I was going and was not a recreational 4x4.
Tires really made that thing handle mud on farm roads or on paths around farm fields where some 4x4 stuff with all terrain tires were getting stuck.
I do not know if the subaru awd is at all similar to what I am describing above, but it is something to check out.
The other part of the above is to seriously consider what tires you have.
I have seen a locked up 2wd truck go past a 4x4 with all terrains spinning its tires. Depends on terrain being covered. The locked up 2wd could keep a tire on something offering traction and that is all she wrote on that one.
Here in east tn some folks do some silly stuff with vehicles they are about to take to junkyards and a serious set of little mud tires on a fwd car can let that car go places that amaze folks.
It does usually damage the car but the point is tires really do matter a lot.
Something else to consider about having 4x4 lo is that the gearing lets you go slower over obstacles. This generally is easier on the vehicle.
I think the subby stuff has a ton of potential and you can find all kinds of stuff made for it or pics and plans so you can make your own.
But I would really pay attention to protecting the bottom of it as already mentioned and getting power to all 4 wheels and have decent tread on all 4 wheels.
I don't know the constant velocity transmission or whatever they are called so I like something with actual gears. I prefer a manual transmission but an automatic with actual gears comes next I guess.
And then the cvt transmission maybe. I would really want to see how those are doing in rallying and other stuff before I would want one. That and who is going to repair it when I tear it up.
BBerry4430
New member
The Subaru AWD set-up isn't really at all similar to the Olds AWD set-up. Here's a great article comparing the different 4WD and AWD designs. http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2013/06/alphabet-soup-4x4-vs-4wd-vs-awd-wheres-the-differential/
From the article: "This also means that the Subaru systems share design elements with traditional rugged body-on-frame SUVs, something that Subaru owners seem to rarely know but might want to brag about."
From the article: "This also means that the Subaru systems share design elements with traditional rugged body-on-frame SUVs, something that Subaru owners seem to rarely know but might want to brag about."
Viggen
Just here...
BS. Sorry but 35 mpg? No way. The gearing is too low.
The manual transmission cars have a viscous locking center diff.
There is a large difference between snow tires and all terrains. Just because the tread pattern is mildly similar does not mean that they are the same. Snow tires are softer and need to be kept cool so as to not wear out faster. Higher rolling resistance and probably poorer mpg. To suggest that someone else do this is dumb and a waste of money as true snow tires tend to be more expensive.
Subarus are great but they are barely more than soft roaders. They will take you places a sedan cannot go in relative comfort but the front and rear overhangs are huge. A little lift helps but then you are moving into driveline angle problems. I took mine down fire roads and it was okay but ran into some issues with *** dragging every now and again. The AWD is pretty good but be smart. If you are going down more than a fire road, use something else.
Dranged
Coffee-Chocolate
I will lend support to the high mileage claim for the Subaru. My folks have an '07 Forester which is 4.11 final drive with FT AWD and they get 32-34 highway going 70-75. I'm fairly certain the 06 2.5i is 3.90 final drive, as is my 03 OBS (Outback Sport, an inpreza-based soob). We get 32+ going 75 and 29 mpg in 'city' driving (as much 'city' driving as there is in Moab
; I've had it to 34+ highway (albeit on a spare going slowly). 36 is a high but I support that it's not unattainable. Also, Its a bit more accurate to consider the Subaru's viscous coupling center diff more as a VLSD rather than a viscous 'locker' as it doesn't "lock". It will slip given loss of traction (e.g. a wheel in the air on on glaze ice). The 5MT (5-speed manuals, not including the STi, and WRXs) is a 50/50 front/rear torque split-off-the line, but the Viscous coupling can vary the torque, as needed based on slippage, to as much as 90/10 or 10/90 bias. The 4EAT (4-speed auto) is not quite as capable of splitting torque, and is 90/10 (front/rear) biased off-the-line, but can vary as needed front/rear (caveat: when the selector is in "1", the center diff does a 50/50 split). There is a mod which can be hot-wired onto a switch which will make the 4-EAT a 50/50 on demand. The Subaru AWD system is brilliant and balanced, the 'symetrical' part of their AWD system is not marketing here. With a transaxle managing the front drive (front diff is housed in the transmission, which pushes the boxer fore of the transmission, and therefore a decreased approach angle) mated to a center diff which sends power out back, All that IS great but these are still unibody cars and not box-on-frame trucks. Suspension travel is limited and body flex is real. Yes there are modifications one can do (lifts, stiffening the body, suspension, etc.) but they're still not 4x4 truck-based systems. In America we're limited by single range transmissions (while the rest of the world had and has dual range FT AWD Subarus), and particularly in a stick, that significantly limits off-road capability.
All-in-all they are VERY capable for a car, and with some mods a Subaru is capable of amazing things, but it'll never touch a slightly modified Tacoma or a stock Rubicon with regards to off-road capability. That said, any new generation Subaru is a FT AWD rig that's AMAZING in snow and in-climate weather, plus much faster and smoother off tarmac than truck-based vehicles AND capable of upper 20s city MPG and low 30's highway. As such, you can do some good playing and off-pavement travel in a Soob while using the same rig for efficient daily driving all while getting high 20s+ in overall fuel efficiency.
Just sayin'
To address the thread question: It depends a little on what you want to call off-road use.
I'd recommend any Forester with an automatic transmission. Outbacks are great but a little less capable when compared to Foresters b/c of wheel base and approach/departure angles. I'd consider the Crosstrek as well despite its CVT (this will certainly limit its capability for rear off-roading) but for its engine, vehicle dimensions, weight and interior space plus 8.7" of ground clearance is great! AWD tucks all the drive-line components high under the vehicle and there aren't bits hanging down as in trucks )shock mounts, rear pumpkin, etc.).
Great question! I'd game to talk off-road (at different levels of capability) Subarus any time!!
Rosco862003
Adventurer
Although 35 mpg isn't the norm, it is the exception and did happen on a flat trip out to the beach. You are more than welcome to call BS as even I find it hard to believe. However, the OP asked for input and I gave what I thought to be a high point of the car. With city driving factored in I average anywhere between 27 and 29, and this number is a bit lower in the winter months.
Regcabguy
Oil eater.
I drove the 2014 Forester non-turbo and was very impressed. Power was up with our Honda Pilot along with driver roominess. Quieter also. Road feel is a little absent I guess due to the electric steering. Back seat folds down almost flat. What I especially liked is the absence of the "high beltline" styling of the Toyota FJ. I don't get the small window immense door engineering. The H3 started it and Toyota followed suit.