Recent Topics
How are these Road Force values?
by mclasser. 12/13/18 05:19 PM
Finally broke down a bought a trailer
by BeerCan. 12/13/18 04:25 PM
What oil for '19 Subaru WRX?
by TKNY. 12/13/18 04:12 PM
Splitting wedges
by buck91. 12/13/18 04:00 PM
Avoiding rust in the rust belt states?
by Chris B.. 12/13/18 03:00 PM
Joey Logano and the 2019 Mustang
by Malo83. 12/13/18 02:40 PM
BMW LL01FE Spec
by The Critic. 12/13/18 02:03 PM
I Tried and Failed to Not Buy a New Car
by badtlc. 12/13/18 01:49 PM
OEM Brand Coolant by Rocochem
by NumbersGuy. 12/13/18 01:15 PM
Motomaster Dexron Vi Fully Synthetic
by Gannet167. 12/13/18 12:55 PM
Hacked
by Smoky14. 12/13/18 12:41 PM
Scanning for U codes.
by LeakySeals. 12/13/18 12:23 PM
Food photography trickery
by nthach. 12/13/18 11:29 AM
oil for 2.5 2013 vw passat?
by jstert. 12/13/18 09:47 AM
Newest Members
lordcheeto, WondrousBread, slickoo9, turntable_life, Poles19
66670 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
96 registered members (Balrog006, bdcardinal, AndyB, Bbonez, 10 invisible), 1,823 guests, and 40 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Statistics
Forums67
Topics295,035
Posts4,926,481
Members66,670
Most Online2,553
Oct 27th, 2018
Donate to BITOG
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Hop To
Page 1 of 5 1 2 5
Forester more economical than Acccord? Surely not! #4479760
08/05/17 09:30 AM
08/05/17 09:30 AM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 16,183
OH
fdcg27 Offline OP
fdcg27  Offline OP
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 16,183
OH
Anyone who has owned earlier Subaru AWDs is well aware that great fuel economy was not among their virtues.
Our '09 Forester would always yield fuel economy about 15% inferior to what we saw from our '99 Accord, although the Accord was a stick which probably helped.
We are now about 2300 miles into the '17 Forester we bought four weeks ago. Imagine my surprise in finding that the Subie actually yields about 10% better fuel economy in similar driving conditions than our '12 Accord, which is also around 200 pounds lighter than the Forester and obviously has fewer driven parts, lacking drive to the rear wheels.
On my wife's commute, the Accord averaged around 28 mpg while the 'roo is giving around 31 mpg.
My wife's one reservation about buying another Forester involved fuel economy and that proved to be unfounded.
Just a bit of anecdotal data for anyone looking to buy an AWD in this size range who might be concerned about fuel economy.


18 Accord Hybrid FF
17 Forester 18K VME 0W-20
12 Accord LX 96K SSO 0W-20
09 Forester 95K M1HM 10W-30
01 Focus ZX3 118K PP 5W-20
96 Accord LX 104K T5 10W-30
95 318i
Re: Forester more economical than Acccord? Surely not! [Re: fdcg27] #4479771
08/05/17 09:36 AM
08/05/17 09:36 AM
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,091
USA
NHGUY Offline
NHGUY  Offline
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,091
USA
Makes one wonder why VW never stuck with the flat/opposed engine vs their upright 4/5 cylinder offerings all these 40+ years later....

Re: Forester more economical than Acccord? Surely not! [Re: fdcg27] #4479791
08/05/17 09:56 AM
08/05/17 09:56 AM
Joined: Dec 2016
Posts: 7,143
Waco, TX
Linctex Online content
Linctex  Online Content
Joined: Dec 2016
Posts: 7,143
Waco, TX
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
while the 'roo is giving around 31 mpg.


This is almost unbelievable to me.


"The evidence demands a verdict".
(Re:VOA)"it's nearly impossible to actually know the particular additives that are in there at what concentrations."
Re: Forester more economical than Acccord? Surely not! [Re: fdcg27] #4479794
08/05/17 09:57 AM
08/05/17 09:57 AM
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 281
Chadds Ford
Toros Offline
Toros  Offline
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 281
Chadds Ford
You can bank on a new head gasket job at 90-100K with the Subaru boxer 4.

Re: Forester more economical than Acccord? Surely not! [Re: Toros] #4479797
08/05/17 09:59 AM
08/05/17 09:59 AM
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 21,927
Orlando, FL
Mr Nice Offline
Mr Nice  Offline
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 21,927
Orlando, FL
Originally Posted By: Toros
You can bank on a new head gasket job at 90-100K with the Subaru boxer 4.


You sure about that ?

Re: Forester more economical than Acccord? Surely not! [Re: fdcg27] #4479800
08/05/17 10:02 AM
08/05/17 10:02 AM
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 7,485
S California
OneEyeJack Offline
OneEyeJack  Offline
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 7,485
S California
Could it be that Subaru makes some good vehicles even if they are not the volume leaders in their markets and they are a bit different?

Re: Forester more economical than Acccord? Surely not! [Re: Linctex] #4479801
08/05/17 10:02 AM
08/05/17 10:02 AM
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,094
Colorado
Kuato Offline
Kuato  Offline
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,094
Colorado
Originally Posted By: Linctex
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
while the 'roo is giving around 31 mpg.


This is almost unbelievable to me.


Believe it...I drove a new '15 Outback with the 2.5/CVT combo and got up to 34 mpg at lower highway speeds.


Originally Posted By: Mr Nice
Originally Posted By: Toros
You can bank on a new head gasket job at 90-100K with the Subaru boxer 4.


You sure about that ?


Agree with Mr Nice... if we were talking '03 Subaru I'd agree 100%.


Thick vs Thin test: 15k / 43k miles complete
Re: Forester more economical than Acccord? Surely not! [Re: Toros] #4479806
08/05/17 10:10 AM
08/05/17 10:10 AM
Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 259
Toronto, Canada
Tech819 Offline
Tech819  Offline
Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 259
Toronto, Canada
Originally Posted By: Toros
You can bank on a new head gasket job at 90-100K with the Subaru boxer 4.



C'mon that seemed to be a problem at least 10 years ago. It's like saying if you buy a 2017 Honda Odyssey be prepared for a transmission problem or a Accord V6 has all those transmission problems.

According to Fueleconmy.gov the Subaru does have better combined economy.

https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=31788&id=37453


2017 Impreza Sport Hatch M1 0w20 OEM filter
2003 Corolla Magnatec 5w30 OEM Filter
2013 Jetta 2.5 Castrol 0w40 OEM filter
Re: Forester more economical than Acccord? Surely not! [Re: fdcg27] #4479814
08/05/17 10:21 AM
08/05/17 10:21 AM
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,548
utah
dareo Offline
dareo  Offline
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,548
utah
As one would expect comparing a CVT DI car to a port injected slushbox. Compare a DI CVT Accord and the Forester and you should see a slight edge to Honda. But even that isn't fair since the Subaru offers AWD.


2016 Golf Wagon 5MT, 2014 Accord Sport 6MT, 2016 GMC 1500 SLT 6.2
Re: Forester more economical than Acccord? Surely not! [Re: fdcg27] #4479830
08/05/17 10:35 AM
08/05/17 10:35 AM
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,970
MTL, CANADA
Rolla07 Offline
Rolla07  Offline
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,970
MTL, CANADA
Wow, good mpg. Wonder if it will get better once broken in.

Last edited by Rolla07; 08/05/17 10:36 AM.

2007 Corolla Red Pearl 155k miles
PP 0w20 & ST 4967

Re: Forester more economical than Acccord? Surely not! [Re: fdcg27] #4479836
08/05/17 10:39 AM
08/05/17 10:39 AM
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 21,114
Upstate NY
Donald Online content
Donald  Online Content
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 21,114
Upstate NY
The Forester may not be a super exciting car to drive but it's AWD and gets good mileage.

Exciting to my wife is a sunroof and satellite radio.


2015 Subaru Forester 2.5 engine/CVT
2015 Ford F250 w/Powerstroke
2016 Subaru Crosstrek CVT (wife's)
Re: Forester more economical than Acccord? Surely not! [Re: fdcg27] #4479842
08/05/17 10:44 AM
08/05/17 10:44 AM
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 4,041
Utah
CKN Offline
CKN  Offline
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 4,041
Utah
I traded in my 2012 Legacy for various reasons. But the mpg figures that are being quoting above are accurate. AND yes they do beat the EPA test figures.

Re: Forester more economical than Acccord? Surely not! [Re: CKN] #4479852
08/05/17 10:50 AM
08/05/17 10:50 AM
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 10,968
OH
SatinSilver Offline
SatinSilver  Offline
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 10,968
OH
Originally Posted By: CKN
I traded in my 2012 Legacy for various reasons. But the mpg figures that are being quoting above are accurate. AND yes they do beat the EPA test figures.


I remember you mentioning the paint chips on the front end. A week or so ago I touched up the front hood of the Camry and the front and rear bumper covers. I even picked up some fine tip paint brushes from the craft section of Walmart. But the pen tip did an excellent job filling the chip. The greater the pressure that's applied the more paint comes out. So for the tiny ones it takes a gentle hand. But very satisfied with how it turned out.

Returned the paint brushes since I never used them. Wiped all the chips first with rubbing alcohol for adhesion.

Re: Forester more economical than Acccord? Surely not! [Re: fdcg27] #4479866
08/05/17 11:11 AM
08/05/17 11:11 AM
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,264
Lexington, KY
BearZDefect Offline
BearZDefect  Offline
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,264
Lexington, KY
Gasoline is also very good right now, I have seen some record MPG from our cars this past month. Six months ago they couldn't get anywhere close to this on the same trips.

Re: Forester more economical than Acccord? Surely not! [Re: fdcg27] #4479958
08/05/17 12:57 PM
08/05/17 12:57 PM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 42,299
New Jersey
JHZR2 Offline
JHZR2  Offline
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 42,299
New Jersey
My father gets over 30mpg in mixed driving with his 14 forester.

Page 1 of 5 1 2 5

BOB IS THE OIL GUY® Powered by UBB.threads™