2019 Crosstrek

[Ws6]

Originally Posted by gofast182
Originally Posted by Quattro Pete
Originally Posted by gofast182
Nope, not many luxury SUVs can beat it. Just look at these 0-60 times (all Motortrend for consistency).

NX300 - 6.9s (3,900lb)
GLC 300 - 6.9s (3,947lb)
Forester XT - 6.8s (3,653lb)
X3 30i - 6.7s (4,236lb)
QX50 - 6.6s (3,810lb)
MKC - 6.5s (3,823lb)
RDX - 6.4s (3,783lb)
Q5 2.0T - 5.9s (4,057lb)
Stelvio - 5.4s (4,044lb)


But some non-luxury SUVs can beat it, for example Mazda CX5 (6.4s), or Ford Edge ST AWD (6.1s).



Well those must be typos. The XT is the fastest in its class and even faster than most 2.0T luxury SUVs because "Obviously there are Luxury models that compete with it."

lol, no, they aren't typos. The CX5 turbo and Edge ST will beat it handily.

 

[gofast182]

Originally Posted by Al
Just more feedback. The Crosstreck got an "indicated" 35.1 mpg over the first 150 milles. I did about 50 miles comparing what the CrossTrek and my Spark would get.

Both were driven very carefully. The Spark previously got just north of 44 mpg indicated. The CrossTrek 39.7 indicated. Yes its sloe but talk about efficient for AWD

Overall it looks like the Spark averaged 37 winter and summer. The Crosstrek should at least be 32 "actual" .... 10% highway.

That is quite good for AWD even in a small car like the Crosstrek.

 

[buster]

The Crosstrek has a been a huge success for Subaru. There is a lot of value in the vehicle. I'm one that can't ever see spending more than $30k on a car. They are just not worth it. I've been considering used Toyotas for my next car, but their resale value is so high that it makes sense to buy a new Crosstrek.

 

[pandus13]

Originally Posted by kkreit01
It's all relative. A Crosstrek may feel quick compared to a Prius. An XT will feel quick compared to the Crosstrek or many N/A CUVs in it's class. All are good if you own them and are happy with them.

[off-topic]
First, The porky heavier Prius V (the wagon, as big as a mini-minivan Mazda5) maxes out at 104 MPH.
Second, there is a custom Hemi powered Prius somewhere on the roads....It has been show on BITOG at least couple times.
Third, the driver matters: I saw Prius(i) drive straight to left lane and traffic could not keep up with them. Also saw sport cars (corvette, jaguar, mustang, maseratti, etc) in the right lane holding everybody and not even doing the posted speed.

 

[gathermewool]

Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by gofast182
Originally Posted by Quattro Pete
Originally Posted by gofast182
Nope, not many luxury SUVs can beat it. Just look at these 0-60 times (all Motortrend for consistency).

NX300 - 6.9s (3,900lb)
GLC 300 - 6.9s (3,947lb)
Forester XT - 6.8s (3,653lb)
X3 30i - 6.7s (4,236lb)
QX50 - 6.6s (3,810lb)
MKC - 6.5s (3,823lb)
RDX - 6.4s (3,783lb)
Q5 2.0T - 5.9s (4,057lb)
Stelvio - 5.4s (4,044lb)


But some non-luxury SUVs can beat it, for example Mazda CX5 (6.4s), or Ford Edge ST AWD (6.1s).



Well those must be typos. The XT is the fastest in its class and even faster than most 2.0T luxury SUVs because "Obviously there are Luxury models that compete with it."

lol, no, they aren't typos. The CX5 turbo and Edge ST will beat it handily.


I don't really follow things like which CUV is faster, because, well, it's a CUV.

With that said, 0-60MPH times don't really mean a whole lot to me, especially.
I'm very pleased with my FXT's level of power and acceleration. Even when I'm feeling froggy I typically don't accelerate at more than 75% accelerator position.
At least with my Stage 1 Cobb tune, 100% is faster, but the car sounds better at 4k RPM and 18# of boost than at 5500 RPM.

I think it would be cool to see which one tracks better, handles better in the snow, etc.

 

[Ws6]

Originally Posted by gathermewool

Nope, not many luxury SUVs can beat it. Just look at these 0-60 times (all Motortrend for


I don't really follow things like which CUV is faster, because, well, it's a CUV.

With that said, 0-60MPH times don't really mean a whole lot to me, especially.
I'm very pleased with my FXT's level of power and acceleration. Even when I'm feeling froggy I typically don't accelerate at more than 75% accelerator position.
At least with my Stage 1 Cobb tune, 100% is faster, but the car sounds better at 4k RPM and 18# of boost than at 5500 RPM.

I think it would be cool to see which one tracks better, handles better in the snow, etc.



Subaru skews their snow tests to make the forester look better.
Mazda skews their snow tests to make the cx5 look better.

All I know is I've been pleased with my cx5 in ice and snow. It handles great at high or low speed and tracks beautifully with tons of feedback even with EPS. I like the 310# of torque by 2000rpm and zero turbo lag. It feels like an Lt1 from the mid 90s, lol!

By thd numbers, it seems to XT outstops and outcorners the cx5, while the cx5 handily outaccelrates the XT, especially past 60mph, and the cx5 gets significantly better mpg real world, as my lifetime average is 25.6mpg, including a lot of messing around on the loud pedal.

 

[gathermewool]

Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by gathermewool

Nope, not many luxury SUVs can beat it. Just look at these 0-60 times (all Motortrend for


I don't really follow things like which CUV is faster, because, well, it's a CUV.

With that said, 0-60MPH times don't really mean a whole lot to me, especially.
I'm very pleased with my FXT's level of power and acceleration. Even when I'm feeling froggy I typically don't accelerate at more than 75% accelerator position.
At least with my Stage 1 Cobb tune, 100% is faster, but the car sounds better at 4k RPM and 18# of boost than at 5500 RPM.

I think it would be cool to see which one tracks better, handles better in the snow, etc.



Subaru skews their snow tests to make the forester look better.
Mazda skews their snow tests to make the cx5 look better.

All I know is I've been pleased with my cx5 in ice and snow. It handles great at high or low speed and tracks beautifully with tons of feedback even with EPS. I like the 310# of torque by 2000rpm and zero turbo lag. It feels like an Lt1 from the mid 90s, lol!

By thd numbers, it seems to XT outstops and outcorners the cx5, while the cx5 handily outaccelrates the XT, especially past 60mph, and the cx5 gets significantly better mpg real world, as my lifetime average is 25.6mpg, including a lot of messing around on the loud pedal.



With the exception of poorer visibility, when compared to the Forester, I really like the CX-5. I haven't driven one since we were shopping for our '14, but I recall the CX-5 handling better than the Forester. The kicker, back then, was the motor and CVT's seamless power output in the FXT. Kind of all moot now, since the FXT is gone. We'll have to compare the OBXT going forward.

Our MPG ave is 23.4 MPG. It was higher, but we moved closer to the city, so my wife literally drives a couple of miles to places and back for most of her trips. She shops at some stores farther away, just so she can get some more miles on the FXT. Our Legacy's average is 30.3. My commute is shorter in the new place, which has negatively affected my MPG.


Again, I'm at an age now, that I don't really care about which CUV has the ultimate handling or power. I tend to skew more toward which is the most practical without looking like booty butt. By this, I mean that I want something with great visibility, great use of space and comfortable seats for long trips, with decent power, competent handling, competent AWD (I'm a big fan of winter tiers, so AWD isn't at the top of my list of wants in a vehicle), etc.; all without costing an arm and a leg.

The Forester ticks a lot of boxes....except for the seats. The seats in our Legacy are fine, but the leather seats in our FXT suck! It's almost to the point where I might not even consider a Subaru which has similarly bad seats going forward.

Finally, if I buy another Subaru, it's very likely going to be because I'm comfortable with the brand. I'll look around when the time comes, but that does add points to the Subaru bin.

 

[Ws6]

Originally Posted by gathermewool
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by gathermewool

Nope, not many luxury SUVs can beat it. Just look at these 0-60 times (all Motortrend for


I don't really follow things like which CUV is faster, because, well, it's a CUV.

With that said, 0-60MPH times don't really mean a whole lot to me, especially.
I'm very pleased with my FXT's level of power and acceleration. Even when I'm feeling froggy I typically don't accelerate at more than 75% accelerator position.
At least with my Stage 1 Cobb tune, 100% is faster, but the car sounds better at 4k RPM and 18# of boost than at 5500 RPM.

I think it would be cool to see which one tracks better, handles better in the snow, etc.



Subaru skews their snow tests to make the forester look better.
Mazda skews their snow tests to make the cx5 look better.

All I know is I've been pleased with my cx5 in ice and snow. It handles great at high or low speed and tracks beautifully with tons of feedback even with EPS. I like the 310# of torque by 2000rpm and zero turbo lag. It feels like an Lt1 from the mid 90s, lol!

By thd numbers, it seems to XT outstops and outcorners the cx5, while the cx5 handily outaccelrates the XT, especially past 60mph, and the cx5 gets significantly better mpg real world, as my lifetime average is 25.6mpg, including a lot of messing around on the loud pedal.



With the exception of poorer visibility, when compared to the Forester, I really like the CX-5. I haven't driven one since we were shopping for our '14, but I recall the CX-5 handling better than the Forester. The kicker, back then, was the motor and CVT's seamless power output in the FXT. Kind of all moot now, since the FXT is gone. We'll have to compare the OBXT going forward.

Our MPG ave is 23.4 MPG. It was higher, but we moved closer to the city, so my wife literally drives a couple of miles to places and back for most of her trips. She shops at some stores farther away, just so she can get some more miles on the FXT. Our Legacy's average is 30.3. My commute is shorter in the new place, which has negatively affected my MPG.


Again, I'm at an age now, that I don't really care about which CUV has the ultimate handling or power. I tend to skew more toward which is the most practical without looking like booty butt. By this, I mean that I want something with great visibility, great use of space and comfortable seats for long trips, with decent power, competent handling, competent AWD (I'm a big fan of winter tiers, so AWD isn't at the top of my list of wants in a vehicle), etc.; all without costing an arm and a leg.

The Forester ticks a lot of boxes....except for the seats. The seats in our Legacy are fine, but the leather seats in our FXT suck! It's almost to the point where I might not even consider a Subaru which has similarly bad seats going forward.

Finally, if I buy another Subaru, it's very likely going to be because I'm comfortable with the brand. I'll look around when the time comes, but that does add points to the Subaru bin.

A big thing for me was sound, as I do a lot of road-trips. The CX5 comes in as pretty quiet, and it makes a huge difference on a road trip.

 

[Al]

Originally Posted by Ws6
The CX5 turbo and Edge ST will beat it handily.

Uh no

They are close but subaru wins

Mazda 6.4 seconds
https://www.motortrend.com/cars/mazda/cx-5/2019/2019-mazda-cx-5-turbo-first-test-review/

Subaru 6.2 seconds
https://www.motortrend.com/cars/subaru/forester/2014/2014-subaru-forester-limited-xt-first-test/

Any number of sources indicated subaru is superior to Mazda off road and in snow
https://www.kbb.com/car-news/subaru-forester-vs-mazda-cx-5-comparison/2100006441/

In addition Wards 10 best engines give the not to the subaru FA 2.0 No engine matches that record. That is 100% why I bought it.

 

[4WD]

EST 5.6 ?

 

[Ws6]

Originally Posted by Al
Originally Posted by Ws6
The CX5 turbo and Edge ST will beat it handily.

Uh no

They are close but subaru wins

Mazda 6.4 seconds
https://www.motortrend.com/cars/mazda/cx-5/2019/2019-mazda-cx-5-turbo-first-test-review/

Subaru 6.2 seconds
https://www.motortrend.com/cars/subaru/forester/2014/2014-subaru-forester-limited-xt-first-test/
Still slower in the quarter mile even if it won in the 0-60, also, newer tests show it at 6.8 seconds, so if you got a newer one, maybe they are half a second slower to 60, now, due to tuning revisions?
Any number of sources indicated subaru is superior to Mazda off road and in snow
https://www.kbb.com/car-news/subaru-forester-vs-mazda-cx-5-comparison/2100006441/

In addition Wards 10 best engines give the not to the subaru FA 2.0 No engine matches that record. That is 100% why I bought it.




Depends on who films the video, as to who does better in snow and ice, but having driven in snow and ice in my CX5, I can tell you it does just fine, and anything else would be an academic difference. It goes up my 27% grade, 300ft drive-way, when snow-covered , on worn out all-seasons (or rather, my 2015 did, and the 2019 I have seems to be even more responsive as a system since Mazda re-tuned it for 2017 and again in 2019?).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLnFHKZLApk

You can see here that in VERY low traction biased situations, their AWD systems are more or less equivalent with the steering wheel dead-on. When you turn the wheel is when Mazda pulls into the lead, as seen in the above video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ak4aOxv6_RQ

Here you can see the CX9's turbo engine receiving a Ward's 10 best accolade in 2017. In fact, it was the #1. The CX5 uses the same engine/turbo/tuning/etc.
https://www.wardsauto.com/2017/2017-winner-mazda-cx-9-25l-dohc-turbocharged-i-4
Quote
2017 Winner: Mazda CX-9 2.5L DOHC Turbocharged I-4


When Wards tested the engine in the Forester, it did not get an award, instead they offered the award to t he engine in the WRX, after SIGNIFICANT changes were made, so no, the engine in your Forester XT is not equivalent to the Wards honor engine (nor did that engine get the #1 spot).
https://www.wardsauto.com/diesel/variety-distinguishes-2015-ward-s-10-best-engines
Quote
Subaru delivers a new rally-car hotshot, the compact WRX sedan, and the 2.0L turbocharged 4-cyl. boxer under the hood makes it, as one editor says, the best yet.

WardsAuto tested this engine last year in the Forester CUV, but it returns in the WRX with an extra 18 hp and a torque peak that arrives as early as 2,000 rpm and extends the powerband. Plus, the WRX version needs only 15.9 psi (1 bar) of boost pressure (compared with 17.1 psi [1.1 bar] in the Forester), which translates into better fuel economy. Some editors achieved an outstanding 28 mpg (8.4 L/100 km).

With valve springs re-engineered for higher revving, as well as new camshafts, rocker arms and electronic controller, the WRX engine pairs up perfectly with a 6-speed manual that makes rowing through gears a thrill. This fleet-footed boxer steps into the ring with fire in its eyes.



So in other words, you 100% bought the wrong vehicle, apparently. Also, this might explain why your 2.0XT is so much slower than the one in 2014 when it debut'ed, as 5mph and 0.7 seconds in the quarter are a HUGE difference not explained by car-to-car variance.
https://www.torquenews.com/1084/biggest-subaru-stories-2018-recalls-and-lawsuits-lead-all
Quote
The new lawsuit claimed Subaru repaired 2014-2016 Forester 2.0XT (2.0-liter turbo), WRX and WRX STI 2.5-liter turbocharged engines by "de-tuning" the engines in an attempt to fix the damage that had already been done.

That might explain it. They just de-tuned them.

https://www.motortrend.com/cars/sub...forester-20xt-touring-first-test-review/
You can see here how your 2017 is doing. Much worse than the 2014 likely due to tuning revisions. In fact, it's turning 6.8 to 60 and won't even get into the 14's in the quarter. Mid 15's is all it's good for, there.

 

[SubieRubyRoo]

I've talked here several times about it... I hope the 2.4 turbo brings a resurgence across the Subaru line for turbo'd family vehicles that are at the top of their respective class heaps. Think about Subaru's "glory days"- the 2004-2009 years when Impreza (WRX), Outback, and Legacy could all be had with essentially identical turbo EJ25s... and the aftermarket (and people) responded. The only thing in those days you couldn't get a turbo in was the base Impreza and the Tribeca.

Nowadays, the Ascent is turbo'd, and the 2020 Legacy and Outback are turbo again as well. Take the WRX's FA20 turbo and stick it in the base (uplevel) Impreza and Crosstrek and detune them to around 225HP; Stick the 2.4 in the WRX and stick a bigger turbo on it for around 330-350HP; make a limited edition Outback and Legacy with the same engine. Add only about $2500-3000 to the sticker to get the turbo, and watch all them sell like mad! Not only new customers, but also current Subaru owners fed up with having to floor it when turning onto the onramp and standing on the gas for 15 seconds just to be able to merge.

I would love to see the WRX STI get a bored/stroked FA24 out to about 2.8L, stick a 62mm Precision Turbo (they are just right up the road in Hebron, IN) and have it make a solid 400HP/400 ft-lbs. I personally would "de-option" the STI compared to a WRX Limited because if you're buying an STI, you want all-out performance sometimes at the expense of some creature comforts.

 

[Al]

Originally Posted by Ws6
[


Depends on who films the video, as to who does better in snow and ice,

Check ] 10 different sources the vast majority will say Subaru is best or #1. Mazda? not so much

Quote
Here you can see the CX9's turbo engine receiving a Ward's 10 best accolade in 2017. In fact, it was the #1. The CX5 uses the same engine/turbo/tuning/etc.
https://www.wardsauto.com/2017/2017-winner-mazda-cx-9-25l-dohc-turbocharged-i-4

2017 Winner: Mazda CX-9 2.5L DOHC Turbocharged I-4

Yea they made it once. The FA made 3 times in the last 7 years. Like I said no other engine has done that. There is no #1 they are listed alphabetically.

My point is that both vehicles are equally close no matter what source. If anything Subaru has the edge. At any rate Mazda will not "show the Forester its tail lights" thats a lol

You are a fanboi I get that so am I. I'm done

 

[Ws6]

Originally Posted by Al
Originally Posted by Ws6
[


Depends on who films the video, as to who does better in snow and ice,

Check ] 10 different sources the vast majority will say Subaru is best or #1. Mazda? not so much

Quote
Here you can see the CX9's turbo engine receiving a Ward's 10 best accolade in 2017. In fact, it was the #1. The CX5 uses the same engine/turbo/tuning/etc.
https://www.wardsauto.com/2017/2017-winner-mazda-cx-9-25l-dohc-turbocharged-i-4

2017 Winner: Mazda CX-9 2.5L DOHC Turbocharged I-4

Yea they made it once. The FA made 3 times in the last 7 years. Like I said no other engine has done that. There is no #1 they are listed alphabetically.

My point is that both vehicles are equally close no matter what source. If anything Subaru has the edge. At any rate Mazda will not "show the Forester its tail lights" thats a lol

You are a fanboi I get that so am I. I'm done

The 2013 and 2014 xt was close. The 2017 and 2018? Way off the mark due to retuning.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted by Al
Yea they made it once. The FA made 3 times in the last 7 years. Like I said no other engine has done that. There is no #1 they are listed alphabetically.


Originally Posted by Wards
BMW has won 34 Wards 10 Best Engines trophies over the past 25 years (tied with Ford for the all-time lead), and 28 of those awards were for inline 6-cyl. engines.


It would seem the accolade belongs to BMW and Ford, in terms of winningest entries overall.

Of note, by year:
2019 - FCA Pentastar 3.6L
2018 - FCA Pentastar 3.6L
2017 - FCA Pentastar 3.6L
2013 - FCA Pentastar 3.6L
2012 - FCA Pentastar 3.6L
2011 - FCA Pentastar 3.6L

BMW's N54 is on the list 3 years in a row: 2007, 2008 and 2009.
Chrysler's 5.7L HEMI is on the list 5 years in a row: 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, then 2009

So there are a lot of engines on that list more than three times in seven years.

 

[Al]

Originally Posted by Ws6

The 2013 and 2014 xt was close. The 2017 and 2018? Way off the mark due to retuning.

Say what you want. The block/internals did not change one iota. They gave it to subaru bc of the soundness of the engine and the abiliity to add more mower . Even in its unblown state the FA made 203 HP out of 2L. All the more impressive. The engine is equivalent in strength to the 2.0 Nissan SR20 DE which was known to produce 550HP. The FA20 has produced 650 without modifying the internals. I am sure you know all that.

But enough this board doesn't give a rips..t about 2 fanbois (you and me) arguing about 2 very minor players Mazda (ranked 17 in world production) and Subaru ranked #22.

 

[KrisZ]

I like the Crosstrek, seems like a good compromise between economy, utility and some off road capability. I almost pulled a trigger on one when I had two kids. Good thing I didn't because shortly afterwards a needed to shop for a minivan.

 

[Ws6]

Originally Posted by Al
Originally Posted by Ws6

The 2013 and 2014 xt was close. The 2017 and 2018? Way off the mark due to retuning.

Say what you want. The block/internals did not change one iota. They gave it to subaru bc of the soundness of the engine and the abiliity to add more mower . Even in its unblown state the FA made 203 HP out of 2L. All the more impressive. The engine is equivalent in strength to the 2.0 Nissan SR20 DE which was known to produce 550HP. The FA20 has produced 650 without modifying the internals. I am sure you know all that.

But enough this board doesn't give a rips..t about 2 fanbois (you and me) arguing about 2 very minor players Mazda (ranked 17 in world production) and Subaru ranked #22.

The fa20 is okay once you get past the faulty valve springs, bucket loads of turbo lag, and oil consumption issues I guess. And the poor fuel economy. But strong pistons, yo!

 

[garlicbreadman]

Bro, your crosstrek is slow. Its painfully slow. I have driven a 16 and the 19 is not any different for acceleration. Gradual acceleration is fine but when you try to give it the beans, nothing really happens. I assume you havent even driven it hard with 100 miles on it. Drive it longer and you'll see.
https://youtu.be/kgfOexKClLE

0-60 in 10-11 seconds. That is SLOW by todays standard..very slow.

 

[gofast182]

Originally Posted by Al
Originally Posted by Ws6

The 2013 and 2014 xt was close. The 2017 and 2018? Way off the mark due to retuning.

Say what you want. The block/internals did not change one iota. They gave it to subaru bc of the soundness of the engine and the abiliity to add more mower . Even in its unblown state the FA made 203 HP out of 2L. All the more impressive. The engine is equivalent in strength to the 2.0 Nissan SR20 DE which was known to produce 550HP. The FA20 has produced 650 without modifying the internals. I am sure you know all that.

But enough this board doesn't give a rips..t about 2 fanbois (you and me) arguing about 2 very minor players Mazda (ranked 17 in world production) and Subaru ranked #22.

I think we need to change your name from Al to Baghdad Bob. There's a line between being a "fanboi" and being out-of-touch and ridiculous, you are the latter when it comes to Subaru.