Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Mandalorian, 275 miles isn't bad for me, I've become accustomed to only getting 260 out of my Santa Fe over the years.
Forester definitely looks enticing with a Turbo engine, looks like my options would be either the 2.0XT Premium or 2.0XT Touring. I'll need to take a closer look there.
The Forester also had another major redo in 2014. Transmissions changed from a standard 4-speed to a CVT (or manual with the base non turbo). The turbo also get you larger tires, stiffer suspension, and paddle shifters that can simulate a 6 speed or 8 speed transmission.
There is no v6 in the Forester, it's a 170 horsepower 2.5 liter boxer engine or the 250 horsepower 2.0 Boxer turbo.
In Colorado turbocharged and supercharged engines have a distinct advantage as they lose much less horsepower than a normally aspirated engine. N.A. engines lose between 3 & 4 horsepower for every 1,000 feet of elevation gain. So at 10,000 feet you've lost 35% +/- of your horsepower.
The Premium Forester XT is a pretty good deal. You don't get the "eyesight" (automatic cruise control, lane departure, etc.). And you don't get leather and you don't get the higher end radio with nav ... but the radio & nav. suck anyway (IMO).
the outside of the Forester is the seat comfort. Depending on your size and body proportions, many larger people find the seats uncomfortable.
Heuberger Sub. dealership is located in Colorado Springs, and their purported to be the largest volume Subaru dealer in the country
Most all of the cars have forum sites were enthusiastic talk about them. This is especially true with Subaru and the Forester ( www.subaruforester.org ).
I will probably buy one year used if I can, so I'm keeping a close eye on how 2014 models (and maybe 2015) continue to fare in owner's experiences.
One year used would probably be as pricy as new. Check on truecar.com for new prices.
Interesting observation on the RAV4. I just test drove a new one 2 days ago as potential replacement for my CX-9 (it has only 50K miles but not very optimistic on long-term reliability and wife does not want to drive it due to the size). I liked the standard rearview camera. It was a bit noisy but at least the 6 speed shifted fine. It was much better than the 2011 CRV we had. I then test drove a V6 Kia Sorento and it was much better just not sure about long term reliability. The I4 Sorento struggled even on flat roads. Which brings me to another suggestion, the Sportage. Might be able to get a good deal on a used one on this.
In Colorado turbocharged and supercharged engines have a distinct advantage as they lose much less horsepower than a normally aspirated engine. N.A. engines lose between 3 & 4 horsepower for every 1,000 feet of elevation gain. So at 10,000 feet you've lost 35% +/- of your horsepower.
Now that's interesting, I never knew about that correlation, and also seems to explain why Subarus are so popular there. I've driven 4 cylinders in Colorado, Wyoming and Utah, and they always seemed fine... until you needed to pass someone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 00molavi
One year used would probably be as pricy as new. Check on truecar.com for new prices.
Interesting observation on the RAV4. I just test drove a new one 2 days ago as potential replacement for my CX-9 (it has only 50K miles but not very optimistic on long-term reliability and wife does not want to drive it due to the size). I liked the standard rearview camera. It was a bit noisy but at least the 6 speed shifted fine. It was much better than the 2011 CRV we had. I then test drove a V6 Kia Sorento and it was much better just not sure about long term reliability. The I4 Sorento struggled even on flat roads. Which brings me to another suggestion, the Sportage. Might be able to get a good deal on a used one on this.
It's weird, Hyundai owns 1/3 of Kia and yet their cars still seems to lag behind Hyundai in reliability. I dropped Kia from the list personally because the mileage is subpar, otherwise I would have given the Sportage a harder look.
What made you less than optimistic about the CX-9's longevity?
Mazda's reliability is near the tops in Consumer Reports magazines for the past 2 years. Up there with Lexus and Subaru and I think above Honda. Keep in mind CX-5 is made in Japan and shipped to the USA. This is a plus for reliability, IMO.
Sometimes you will find real world fuel MPG to be lower or higher than advertised. It depends on the manufacturer. If you want to see what kind of MPG real people are getting, go to www fuelly dot com. People from all over post the actual MPG they are getting. You can select by year, make, model and then see all the trim levels.
I've done a lot of driving with a 4-Cyl Outback on CO mountain roads, and quite a few times I found myself wondering how feasable it would be to drop in a Small Block Chevy V8.
If you're going to drive in CO, I'd get a turbo model, speaking from experience.
If you go with the Forester, I would recommend picking the top trim level. The Radar Cruise control is a very cool feature and something rarely found outside of luxury cars.
I've done a lot of driving with a 4-Cyl Outback on CO mountain roads, and quite a few times I found myself wondering how feasable it would be to drop in a Small Block Chevy V8.
If you're going to drive in CO, I'd get a turbo model, speaking from experience.
If you go with the Forester, I would recommend picking the top trim level. The Radar Cruise control is a very cool feature and something rarely found outside of luxury cars.
Do you know if the top trim model has a better interior? I think if I could combine the Forester with the interior of a Ford, the sporty handling of the CX-5 and the reliability of a Honda I'd have the perfect car.
Last edited by COSpringsBound; 01-23-2015 at 04:46 PM..
Good to see Mazda is being rated well there, maybe the tide is turning? I know my MPG was lower than the EPA rating for my Santa Fe, which was brutal (a little over a 16 MPG lifetime average). I'd even appreciate a 5 MPG improvement from there, which could save me a bundle. Right now I'm trying to compare and contrast savings from high MPG (but rolling the dice on reliability and risk of repairs outside of warranties) with lower MPG (but with a great warranty, like I had with Hyundai).
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
