Subaru Forester - OK or a world of pain waiting to happen?

[Micrashed]

These are currently on my radar, with pre 2001 examples firmly in shitter money territory.

 

It ticks a lot of MicraShed boxes, towing capacity and number of doors with the benefit of AWD fun.

 

So are they OK? Or do they have gearboxes and gubbins made of cheesium?

[Station]

My mate was upset when work took away his Forester and gave him a Disco instead.

[Bren]

I hope you have shares in total / shell/ BP.

 

A work colleague has one- he spends over £400 a month in fuel from his own pocket.

 

You have been warned.

[Micrashed]

Daily mileage is just 12 or so, so not unduly concerned about an oil guzzler.

[KruJoe]

In that case, get a Turbo!

 

 

This is my old man's S-Turdo. He loves it. I don't really enjoy driving it though.

Yes, the thirsty engine is great (same EJ20 tool eater intercooled boxer four as Imprezas), suspension and tyres are a good compromise, but the rest is wrong. The clutch feels sort of inside out, and treacle-ish. The slave is inside the bell-housing and apparently pulls rather than pushing (???). The gearbox is notchy and cannot be rushed - far from ideal with this engine. Imported autos are cheap now, maybe worth a try? The steering is way over-light and lifeless.

This one is fairly low mileage (70K?), but has already had a clutch or two, drop links all round, rear hubs and shockers, and it sounds again like the back diff or more likely bearings want doing again. And it has done only a little heavy towing.

It needs new calipers and disks on the back, it's almost completely without brakes at the back despite a rebuild, and now the fronts have been working too hard and warped the rotors.

 

I have still never tried either a turbo'd Impreza, or a N/A Ferreter. The latter may be way better than my father's. I've had three N/A Imprezas myself, and they were ace to drive, a really good steer, especially the 2.0 Sport. All N/A cars of that age had a more conventional clutch, slick gears, and a HI/LO lever for snow drifts, muddy hills and crawling in traffic. Great cars.

 

 

I'd be interested to hear how a non-blown one drives, if you can find a clean one. It'll still be thirsty, but the turbo is on another level.

As well as issues mentioned, look for scabby wheels, grot on front wings, and oil leaks onto the manifolds.

[Micrashed]

Cheers, you see thats what I like about Autoshite - real tales from real people as opposed to "Orrl cars older than 18 months are shit" on Honest John.

[Luckythirteen]

The non turbo ones can do big mileages (I knew of one that finally died well over 200k, when the rear diff went), but they need looked after quite a lot. Based on my dad's Legacy, and the few other Subarus round and about, I was thinking the same as KruJoe said: there's always something to fix, and they leak oil.

At least they don't have the doors with no window frames. Do they have the issue with the alarm and central locking, where it develops a mind of its' own if you get out with the keys still in the ignition? I know it's supposed to stop you locking the keys in, but sometimes it has a hissy fit, and refuses to lock at all, then the alarm joins the party.

[nacho man]

 

 

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Subaru-Forester-GLS-2-0-1998-S-reg-/171268306030?pt=Automobiles_UK&hash=item27e062f46e

[gordonbennet]

Worth finding one thats already been LPG converted, lots have, but make sure someone fitted a flashlube kit to it, and make sure its running spot on, they do suffer from valve seat recession running LPG, as do many Japanese cars.

 

That full time 4WD really saps the fuel, my Mrs runs the Mitsi equivalent of Forester, namely an 04 Outlander, same 4WD system, OK its a 2.4 straight 4 cyl and auto, but the best it will do is 23mpg and it doesn't make a scrap of difference how you drive it, maybe 1mpg better for driving like a vicar.

Luckily its on LPG, so effectively costs about the same to run as a petrol motor doing 40mpg.

[NorfolkNWeigh]

A mate is on his fourth Forrester, he does about 70,000 miles a year driving between Cornwall, Gloucestershire and Scotland . His last one had done about 260,000 when it was changed ,on its original clutch and one of his colleagues bought it for his missus. As well as pounding motorways he drives them off road everyday and reckons the only time he ever needs towing is when the ruts are too deep for Defenders, which is quite often as he's a forester.

His boss,also has an old Legacy at his house in the country apparently even though he and the rest of his family are usually seen in either VAG lease cars or Land Rovers and Bentleys when not in horse and carts. So you'd be in good company.

[Asimo]

I have an 04 Legacy saloon, manual, bought at 3 years old, I didn't buy the Forester I went to look at because the Legacy was so much cheaper. My car has the same engine, 2.0 / 130ish hp. In 7 years and 60,000 miles it has been a complete success, despite being modern. I get 34 mpg, it uses no oil at all, and the proper 50:50 four wheel drive is brilliant, tyres seem to last for 40000 or so. Front calipers have needed rebuilding, one of them twice. Track control arm bushes -front and a leaky rear damper, that's about it. Discs from a factor were reasonable and the blacksmith welded the exhaust 3 years ago. The clutch slave cylinder is in the normal, accessible place. A cambelt job was £ 125 at main dealer. I like the frameless wimdows!

 

Hard to know what to replace it with apart from another one with the 3 litre engine.

 

A friend had a Forester Turbo and loved evrything about it but the fuel consumption. Leave the turbo's to the boyz.

[Micrashed]

I had seen that red one and its on my watch pile, along with this 

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/201403072331290/sort/locasc/usedcars/onesearchad/used%2Cnearlynew%2Cnew/make/subaru/quicksearch/true/postcode/pr55sj/page/1/radius/1500/model/forester/price-to/1500?logcode=p

[bub2006]

What is the forester based on? Is it just a chunky impreza? Reason i ask is i just seen a legacy outback that looks same as a legacy just more body plastics and slightly higher suspension.

[Asimo]

The Forester shares the same basics as the Impreza, the body is completely different.

The Outback IS a Legacy estate with more ground clearance and bigger tyres, Plastic wheelarch extensions and chunky bumpers.

[bub2006]

I know the body is different to impreza but i meant If the size is similar. So basically the legacy outback is pretty pointless!

[Asimo]

^^^ They certainly sold well and both Outback and Forester Hold their price. Outback is more comfortable, a "proper" estate car imside, Forester feels more 4x4 in the cabin.

[Barry Cade]

Get my seal of approval, although Subaru specialist mate says 2.5 isn't a good engine. 2.0 for the win.

[bub2006]

My dad had a k plate legacy. Cant remember much about it except it sealed my love for frameless doors and it was comfy inside. Full electric windows and mirrors but no alloys,a/c or sunroof!

[Sudsprint]

My business partner had a Forrester and then an Outback. Both excellent and both juicy.

[kinkersaab]

as a total Subaru freak, I would give complete opposite view. the 2.5 is by far a better driving more frugal and longer lasting engine, some do however use a bit of oil. the engine to avoid in my opinion is the 20 variable vale jobs introduced 2006.  old 123bhp foresters are ace, forever, I have loads of spares should you need any...if you need to know any specifics of subarus, please do just ask. L

[gordonbennet]

Apologies for nicking the thread for a mo.

 

Kinkersaab, as a Subaru nut can i ask your advice please.

 

I contacted the seller of the 3.0 H6 Outback i linked to (or rather Phil Lihp did for me cos i failed miserably) on the ebay tat thread, he mentioned that there was  condensation (as opposed to mayo i hope) on the underside of the oil filler cap, no oil or water usage as such, would you expect that on one of these thats hardly been used recently or would you run a mile.

I know the 3 litre can suffer OMGHGF, and obviously would like to avoid that.

[kinkersaab]

not seen the link, but was it a >2004 H6?  if so I have had a good few, 3 of them have for some reason has overheating h/g type issues at about 100k, I have never dug any deeper with any of them, just disposed of them, there was until recently a lovely looking 52 pearlesent white one knocking about which had H/G type issues, from my experience the older 3.0 aren't worth the extra fuel useage over the robust 2.5's.they are nice, but don't seem to take the miles as well.

[Lacquer Peel]

What are the Subaru diesels like Kinker?

[kinkersaab]

early ones are shit (ime) post 10 plate ones so far have been ok, but that said, I haven't seen or driven one with big miles yet. early ones are a ticking time bomb, I wont buy another...ever.

 

even with newer ones being ok so far, there isn't a saving to be had, they are considerably dearer than petrol ones, and you don't get low box, and they seem to average about 42 ish mpg, a petrol one wont be that  far behind, and fuel is 7p p l less and doesn't sound like a skleleton wanking in a biscuit tin.

[gordonbennet]

Thanks Kinkersaab, if i get one it will be LPG'd once i'm convinced its a good un, so fuel isn't such an issue.

 

Like the M104 engine in my old Benz, it sounds like the H6, and yes its an 02 model, has a good chance of needing OMGCHG replacement at about 100k.

 

Much obliged to me learned friend.

[kinkersaab]

Subaru...lpg..... nah.  not had huge experience, but had a few...... none good.  something to do with burnt valves and poor starting, admittedly all these were the 2.5 legacy engines ones...but to my mind, not worth the hassle, I fi were you, you should look for a 2003 on 2.5 manual,. they will do 35mpg average with no issues, and 38mpg on a steady run, I drive like a twat every where in mine the eml light has been on for the last 8000 miles and in that time I have averaged 33mpg and on a steady long run will get 36mpg over a tankfull, also im running on the cheapest of cheap snow tyres.

 

the older pre 03 ones will struggle to get 27mpg even when nursed, and although good cars, are not a patch on the newer ones.(not a thing often said on here )

 

I managed to pick my 53 plate outback new model with 107k on it for £800, that was amazingly cheap, but bargains can be had, esp at this time of year.  Lee

[kinkersaab]

a pic

[kinkersaab]

There are 3 outbacks on autotrader under £2000, the autos are good, but 2 or 3 mpg less than manuals and no low ration, not really an issue, but I defrfo prefer the manuals. mrs kinkersaab has an auto and its fine.

[Asimo]

What are the Subaru diesels like Kinker?

I don't know what they are like to own but they are vile to drive in the (present model) Outback.

[carlo]

There are 3 outbacks on autotrader under £2000, the autos are good, but 2 or 3 mpg less than manuals and no low ration, not really an issue, but I defrfo prefer the manuals. mrs kinkersaab has an auto and its fine.

 

Another question for you Mr Kinker, I've had my eye on a 99-03 Legacy 2.5 auto saloon for quite a while, is one of the few cars on my hitlist to replace the old 405s with eventually, are the boxes fairly robust on them?  I remember Autocar raving about the ride and handling of these when they were launched.