Subaru Crosstrek

Status
Not open for further replies.
I've owned a 2000 Outback, 2012 Impreza, and 2012 Outback.

Once again: their AWD is the same open-diff as all the others. It's 'controlled' by braking wheels that are spinning. In the specific case of the Imp, it's heavily biased to front wheel drive, which makes it very stable in deep, tracked snow, which you may find beneficial. I just went way too fast, way to often.

In warm weather, I got two best MPG whole-tank of 38 MPG. Mostly 32 MPG in summer, 27 in winter. This was mostly country highway 55 MPH commuting for 60 minutes each way. Cold short trips were AWFUL, 12-15 MPG. MPG dropped fast after 60ish MPH.

My CX-5 got 19 MPG yesterday, at 7f, for a cold-engine 2 mile trip. On the trip back-27 MPG. I see low 30's all the time when the weather is warmish.

The Imp was traded in on a 2016.5 Mazda CX-5. Drive one before you buy the Subie.
 
Originally Posted by Al


Originally Posted by JTK
a Forester is a lot more Subaru in about every way, for about the same money.

Price difference is about $8+K for comparably equipped Forester vs Crosstrek.

My middle of the road (not touring) Forester listed at $31162



$31k!? We got our '14 FXT Touring for only a little more than that!
 
Originally Posted by bobdoo
I've owned a 2000 Outback, 2012 Impreza, and 2012 Outback.

Once again: their AWD is the same open-diff as all the others. It's 'controlled' by braking wheels that are spinning. In the specific case of the Imp, it's heavily biased to front wheel drive, which makes it very stable in deep, tracked snow, which you may find beneficial. I just went way too fast, way to often.

In warm weather, I got two best MPG whole-tank of 38 MPG. Mostly 32 MPG in summer, 27 in winter. This was mostly country highway 55 MPH commuting for 60 minutes each way. Cold short trips were AWFUL, 12-15 MPG. MPG dropped fast after 60ish MPH.

My CX-5 got 19 MPG yesterday, at 7f, for a cold-engine 2 mile trip. On the trip back-27 MPG. I see low 30's all the time when the weather is warmish.

The Imp was traded in on a 2016.5 Mazda CX-5. Drive one before you buy the Subie.


Just to be clear, Subaru's distinctive feature is the center-differential. It's a geared diff, not just a clutch pack.
 
Originally Posted by gathermewool


$31k!? We got our '14 FXT Touring for only a little more than that!


Well it was the XT but it wasn't the touring and had minimum options ($753) other than the Premium package.

Ultimately I paid $29188 OTD. (total)
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by gathermewool
Just to be clear, Subaru's distinctive feature is the center-differential. It's a geared diff, not just a clutch pack.


Only on the manuals. The CVT cars use a clutch pack.

But the real distinctive feature is that Subaru AWD is meant to actually be used, while most of the competition in its price range have part-time systems that are only used when they have to, and overheat rapidly if they're used too much. Subaru's AWD is always on, and the CVT models default to 60/40 front/rear, while the manuals are 50/50. Most other manufacturers in that price range are FWD until the wheels start to slip.
 
If you like the Crosstrek, buy one! You already have a Forester, so you know the Subaru product.

I'd also be extremely surprised if the CVT failure rate is 14%. We have dozens of late model Subies in our fleet at work - Outbacks and Liberty's (Legacy to you), and there hasn't been any transmission issues. My wife is about to get a 2019 Outback as a company car...
 
Originally Posted by macarose
Subaru long-term reliability...

http://www.dashboard-light.com/reports/Subaru.html

Now lower than Land Rover.

Over 25,800 Subarus inspected by mechanics in that study.


See, that's interesting, because consumer reports has them as one of the most reliable brands, and the Crosstrek as their most reliable models.
[Linked Image]


I don't know who these dashboard light folks are, but I think CR has a lot more reach and data.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Originally Posted by macarose
Subaru long-term reliability...

http://www.dashboard-light.com/reports/Subaru.html

Now lower than Land Rover.

Over 25,800 Subarus inspected by mechanics in that study.


See, that's interesting, because consumer reports has them as one of the most reliable brands, and the Crosstrek as their most reliable models.
[Linked Image]


I don't know who these dashboard light folks are, but I think CR has a lot more reach and data.


I'm with you. Looked up the Dodge Charger, this is what I found. So I'm not placing any faith at all in what they say.

09109CD0-47C2-4AC3-AD9F-E6B3718B22C3.png
 
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Originally Posted by macarose
Subaru long-term reliability...

http://www.dashboard-light.com/reports/Subaru.html

Now lower than Land Rover.

Over 25,800 Subarus inspected by mechanics in that study.


See, that's interesting, because consumer reports has them as one of the most reliable brands, and the Crosstrek as their most reliable models.
[Linked Image]


I don't know who these dashboard light folks are, but I think CR has a lot more reach and data.


This poster is referring to a site he runs. His numbers may make sense in that they're based on cars that actually get taken to mechanics, and these would of course be the broken ones.
CR bases their numbers on a survey of a larger population of vehicles, most of which aren't broken and are doing exactly what their owners want every day.
FWIW, my personal experience has been that Subarus are tough machines that give little trouble, although brake pad life has been a little short on our Foresters, like half or less than what I came to expect with our Accords.
 
Originally Posted by macarose
Subaru long-term reliability...

http://www.dashboard-light.com/reports/Subaru.html

Now lower than Land Rover.

Over 25,800 Subarus inspected by mechanics in that study.

If you believe this I have this great bridge in NYC I'll sell 'ya.

But on the other hand Subaru is a very complicated vehicle bc of the opposed 4 and bc on the extra stuff in the drive train-no one can deny that. And yes folks that own them many times turn into fanboys and spend what is needed to keep them on the road. And I would bet Subaru is among the leaders with respect to longevity.

The latest generation is an order of magnitude better in terms of snow handling capability compared to my '08. I couldn't believe how good it is. Looking at the display that shows which which wheels slip. Switching between any wheel is literally tenths of a second. People love or hate them.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by Al
Originally Posted by gathermewool


$31k!? We got our '14 FXT Touring for only a little more than that!


Well it was the XT but it wasn't the touring and had minimum options ($753) other than the Premium package.

Ultimately I paid $29188 OTD. (total)


Well, then there's no real comparison. An XT is a whole level up from the 2.5i. There is no turbo Crosstrek...

Originally Posted by emg
Originally Posted by gathermewool
Just to be clear, Subaru's distinctive feature is the center-differential. It's a geared diff, not just a clutch pack.


Only on the manuals. The CVT cars use a clutch pack.

But the real distinctive feature is that Subaru AWD is meant to actually be used, while most of the competition in its price range have part-time systems that are only used when they have to, and overheat rapidly if they're used too much. Subaru's AWD is always on, and the CVT models default to 60/40 front/rear, while the manuals are 50/50. Most other manufacturers in that price range are FWD until the wheels start to slip.


Thanks! I had DCCD and VTD on my mind!
 
Originally Posted by gathermewool


Well, then there's no real comparison. An XT is a whole level up from the 2.5i. There is no turbo Crosstrek... !

A touring 2.5 NA was $2500 more MSR than the Premium XT. I am truly comparing apples to apples. I want the same level of trim I have on my Premium.. Also I bought the XT not bc of the Turbo but bc the FA engine is superior to the 2.5FB engine which has been plagued with problems (comparatively) The Crosstrek FB20X engine is better than the Forester FB 25B engine.
 
I own a 2017 Crosstrek with a CVT. I bought it brand new, and currently have 26,000 miles on her. I have never been in a situation where I needed more power under the hood. I go up to Big Bear mountains several times a year with four passengers and luggage, and I never have issues. I did a road trip to Canada with four passengers and luggage, and encountered long uphill grades, and not a single issue even when heavy on the gas to pass slowpokes. Would it be nice to have more horses under the hood, sure, why not, but I don't need it.

My complaints about my Crosstrek are:
The sheet metal. I have door dings that drive me nuts. No other car that I have ever owned has dented so easily. If you lean against a door, it buckles in and pops back out, very easily.
The battery. Weak {censored} battery. Up in the snow it struggles to start after being shut off for several hours. Left me stranded twice in heat over 100 Fahrenheit. No doors left open, no lights left on, just wouldn't start. Subaru service dept. says nothing wrong with battery or electrical system.

Otherwise, a fantastic vehicle. The extra ride height, and excellent visibility make it a pleasure to drive in any situation, all day long. To this day, I look for any reason to get in and drive. Whether it's running errands, or driving my wife to any number of shopping malls in So Cal. I always want to drive. I put Nokian tires on it, and ripping around looping on/off ramps are a lot more fun than I ever imagined a high riding CUV could ever be. The OEM tires do no justice for how fun the Crosstrek really is. Talk about being under-tired.

Here is a good read from Motor Trend. Look at the past articles for earlier updates on their long term test, as well. https://www.motortrend.com/cars/sub...aru-crosstrek-review-long-term-update-5/
 
Yeah, given the griping Subaru got about the old Potenza RE92s, I'm a little surprised they replaced them as OEM tires with a Yokohama that's even worse. Those stock Yokos are downright dangerous in snow and ice, and it kind of defeats the whole point of a Subaru when you put such garbage tires on it.
 
Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Yeah, given the griping Subaru got about the old Potenza RE92s, I'm a little surprised they replaced them as OEM tires with a Yokohama that's even worse. Those stock Yokos are downright dangerous in snow and ice, and it kind of defeats the whole point of a Subaru when you put such garbage tires on it.


This gets hyped a lot, but we've had no problems in winter conditions with the OEM Yokohamas on either of our Foresters.
The Continentals that I replaced the OEM tires with on the '09 didn't seem much better and didn't wear as well.
The Pirellis on it now may prove better, but then Pirellis are the premium tire for the aware.
 
Originally Posted by Al
Originally Posted by gathermewool


Well, then there's no real comparison. An XT is a whole level up from the 2.5i. There is no turbo Crosstrek... !

A touring 2.5 NA was $2500 more MSR than the Premium XT. I am truly comparing apples to apples. I want the same level of trim I have on my Premium.. Also I bought the XT not bc of the Turbo but bc the FA engine is superior to the 2.5FB engine which has been plagued with problems (comparatively) The Crosstrek FB20X engine is better than the Forester FB 25B engine.


1. I don't understand how you're comparing a 2.5i to an XT and considering it apple-to-apples. The turbo adds a very specific markup, regardless of whether it's a Premium or a Touring. It's not 100% math, but mostly just math between the two, irrespective of trim.

2. The recent FB engines are just fine. I cannot imagine anyone buying an FA20DIT (emphasis on DIT) over a 2.5i for the sake of longevity. That's a very weak argument.

3. What evidence do you have that the 2.0 is better than the 2.5?
 
Originally Posted by emg
gathermewool said:
But the real distinctive feature is that Subaru AWD is meant to actually be used, while most of the competition in its price range have part-time systems that are only used when they have to, and overheat rapidly if they're used too much. Subaru's AWD is always on, and the CVT models default to 60/40 front/rear, while the manuals are 50/50. Most other manufacturers in that price range are FWD until the wheels start to slip.


The CX-5 *always* drives the rear wheels. Specifically to get better MPG.

Mazda rep explains the tech:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPyRCkt1GHw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VuqjdcDvncs
Click to expand...
 
Originally Posted by gathermewool
Originally Posted by Al
Originally Posted by gathermewool


Well, then there's no real comparison. An XT is a whole level up from the 2.5i. There is no turbo Crosstrek... !

A touring 2.5 NA was $2500 more MSR than the Premium XT. I am truly comparing apples to apples. I want the same level of trim I have on my Premium.. Also I bought the XT not bc of the Turbo but bc the FA engine is superior to the 2.5FB engine which has been plagued with problems (comparatively) The Crosstrek FB20X engine is better than the Forester FB 25B engine.


1. I don't understand how you're comparing a 2.5i to an XT and considering it apple-to-apples. The turbo adds a very specific markup, regardless of whether it's a Premium or a Touring. It's not 100% math, but mostly just math between the two, irrespective of trim.

2. The recent FB engines are just fine. I cannot imagine anyone buying an FA20DIT (emphasis on DIT) over a 2.5i for the sake of longevity. That's a very weak argument.

3. What evidence do you have that the 2.0 is better than the 2.5?

I understand what you are saying but option for option the Crosstrek is 8,000 cheaper than a comparable Forester..what is so hard to understand here?
The FB20X engine is stronger than the bored out 2.5 FB same crank, same block. Its a better engine period.

I (again) am not saying that the Forester is not worth more option for option. I am saying option for option the Crosstrek is cheaper.

Again to me the Turbo power is un-necessary its the better engine that I was after. Both the FA20 and FB20X give me what I want a better stronger engine (do I really need it?-NO-So now I have said it!!)

Originally Posted by bobdoo

The CX-5 *always* drives the rear wheels. Specifically to get better MPG.
Mazda rep explains the tech:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPyRCkt1GHw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VuqjdcDvncs

Give me the Readers Digest version..I hope mazda makes a better car than that video. What is the front/rear bias?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Quattro Pete
Accord Hybrid vs Crosstrek?
2
Replies
21
Views
2K
andrew_j
C
Are dealer courtesy cars usually titled?
2
Replies
20
Views
1K
csandste
RevRider
Cut/Paste Photos Purolator PureOne PL14615 For 2022 Subaru Crosstrek 2.5
Replies
11
Views
1K
RevRider
Shel_B
Popeye the Sailor Man
Replies
10
Views
2K
PandaBear
Graham Piccinini
2003 Lexus GS300
2
Replies
39
Views
3K
Graham Piccinini
Back
Top