buster Joined Nov 16, 2002 Messages 40,365 Location NJ Jun 26, 2013 #1 Overpriced, weak interior and no MT option. Not bad, but not worth what they are asking. I'd take the 100 less hp and get the CrossTrek.
Overpriced, weak interior and no MT option. Not bad, but not worth what they are asking. I'd take the 100 less hp and get the CrossTrek.
Rand Joined Aug 20, 2003 Messages 23,862 Location NE,Ohio Jun 26, 2013 #2 or just get the non-xt model? its available with 174hp and a 6mt. starts at ~~20k subaru hasnt offered a turbo-charged MT Forester since? 2008? so this isnt news. Last edited: Jun 26, 2013
or just get the non-xt model? its available with 174hp and a 6mt. starts at ~~20k subaru hasnt offered a turbo-charged MT Forester since? 2008? so this isnt news.
buster Thread starter Joined Nov 16, 2002 Messages 40,365 Location NJ Jun 26, 2013 #3 ^ +1. I definitely agree with that.
cptbarkey $50 site donor 2024 Joined Feb 27, 2012 Messages 6,933 Location texas Jun 27, 2013 #4 first gen XT's are far superior. of course i am biased (see sig)
Thermo1223 Joined Apr 18, 2005 Messages 3,462 Location Easton, PA Jun 29, 2013 #5 Funny if you have the money a MT transplant in 2009-2013 is pretty cookie cutter. Heck even an STI transplant is easy, plug & play as far as electronics go something that was never the case previously.
Funny if you have the money a MT transplant in 2009-2013 is pretty cookie cutter. Heck even an STI transplant is easy, plug & play as far as electronics go something that was never the case previously.