100k-ish Legacy, Outback, Forester
Discussion
Evening all. Being a fan of the quirky and the sturdy, I'm considering swapping my current chariot (Volvo 850) for a similarly big-booted Subaru of some description. With a budget of, say, £4k, it seems I can get a 3.0 Legacy or Outback from 2004-2005, or a 2.0T or 2.5T Forester from about 2005ish. If anyone could answer the following questions, I'd be one very happy and grateful bunny!
1) Is the autobox in the Legacy or Outback trouble free and generally "alright" to live/drive with? I know it's relatively basic and certainly no ZF 8 speed, but I'm happy with that as long as it's no time-bomb like others. I quite fancy a big barge with a slushbox. I'd seek out a manual a Forester.
2) I know that 100k miles isn't the end for a well-maintained, modern car, BUT, for any of the cars listed so far, would there be anything to be wary of, and how do they generally age?
3) Of the two, I presume the Legacy and Outback are the better motorway cruiser. Whilst the Forester will do motorways quite happily, is it comfortable and relaxed (think quiet, low-revs etc, etc) on a long motorway slog?
4) Finally, earlier research tells me the 2.0T in the Forester is a slighter tougher lump than the 2.5T. Would this be correct? And is there a big difference in performance between the two? I'll willingly accept a slight BHP/torque disadvantage if there're benefits in longevity/reliability.
Thanks!
1) Is the autobox in the Legacy or Outback trouble free and generally "alright" to live/drive with? I know it's relatively basic and certainly no ZF 8 speed, but I'm happy with that as long as it's no time-bomb like others. I quite fancy a big barge with a slushbox. I'd seek out a manual a Forester.
2) I know that 100k miles isn't the end for a well-maintained, modern car, BUT, for any of the cars listed so far, would there be anything to be wary of, and how do they generally age?
3) Of the two, I presume the Legacy and Outback are the better motorway cruiser. Whilst the Forester will do motorways quite happily, is it comfortable and relaxed (think quiet, low-revs etc, etc) on a long motorway slog?
4) Finally, earlier research tells me the 2.0T in the Forester is a slighter tougher lump than the 2.5T. Would this be correct? And is there a big difference in performance between the two? I'll willingly accept a slight BHP/torque disadvantage if there're benefits in longevity/reliability.
Thanks!
1. Boxes are fine and go to mega miles because...
2. They're made exceptionally well. My Impreza is on 93k and feels strong and solid. My Forester is on 122800 as is likewise. In fact I'm going to get it mapped soon to add another 60bhp because...
3. The EJ20 in the Forester (<2005) is around 170bhp and the EJ25 is 225ish. Both are generally as reliable but the latter does have HG issues but that's a simple fix by putting in some studs and a Cosworth HG.
Oh and for motorways they're all good, the legacy and outback 3.0 especially but the Forester does have a lot of wind noise from the door mirror joining the A pillar.
I'd go get this one http://www.pistonheads.com/classifieds/used-cars/s... Add some 17's, rear ARB and drop links, a good exhaust, filter and map and you'll have a wonderful car.
2. They're made exceptionally well. My Impreza is on 93k and feels strong and solid. My Forester is on 122800 as is likewise. In fact I'm going to get it mapped soon to add another 60bhp because...
3. The EJ20 in the Forester (<2005) is around 170bhp and the EJ25 is 225ish. Both are generally as reliable but the latter does have HG issues but that's a simple fix by putting in some studs and a Cosworth HG.
Oh and for motorways they're all good, the legacy and outback 3.0 especially but the Forester does have a lot of wind noise from the door mirror joining the A pillar.
I'd go get this one http://www.pistonheads.com/classifieds/used-cars/s... Add some 17's, rear ARB and drop links, a good exhaust, filter and map and you'll have a wonderful car.
Edited by Ved on Saturday 18th October 23:06
Edited by Ved on Saturday 18th October 23:10
I have a manual 2005 Forester on 97k miles.
Only work needed ever has been the front droplinks at 93k...and even then they weren't bad per sè.
I test drove a 2.0T as well before buying and there's a sizeable performance gap. Definitely test drive both
Only work needed ever has been the front droplinks at 93k...and even then they weren't bad per sè.
I test drove a 2.0T as well before buying and there's a sizeable performance gap. Definitely test drive both
Edited by adingley84 on Saturday 25th October 05:49
Couple of opinions for you...
A friend has a 2003 Outback 3.0 with auto currently on about 160k km. No major probs with the car, at all, and he's had it about 9 years. Can't see him selling it soon. I've driven it a few times, and whilst its not the sharpest tool around, the box is relatively smooth as long as you don't ask too much of it. Just drift along, and all seems to be well. Boot it hard and its a bit slow to respond.
Re 2.0T engine - I've got a 2005 Liberty with this engine, single turbo, 180kW/245bhp. Currently on 190k km and seems to be in rude health. Regular servicing is a must with these. In the pre-04 Forester this engine is detuned to 130kW/175bhp, so I would presume more long-lasting.
I've also had a few drives in both 2.0T and 2.5T Foresters and would agree the 2.5 is notably pokier - supposed to be 155-165kW (205-225bhp). Its still at a lower level of tune than in the WRX and Liberty, so probably less likely to fall to one of the internet problems. Seriously, these engines are like sh!t in a field over here and the cars are easy to sell - if the reputation was that bad, they'd never shift 'em. Tuning seems to be the downfall.
As for the Forester on the motorway, I've also got a 2007 Forester with the N/A 2.5 engine, which I've had from new. Cruises well at 110-120kmh and I've done a few 2500km round trips, fully laden, with a bike on the roof. Yes, its a little noisier than the Liberty, but not that off-putting. Definitely better with manual box.
Hope that lot helps
A friend has a 2003 Outback 3.0 with auto currently on about 160k km. No major probs with the car, at all, and he's had it about 9 years. Can't see him selling it soon. I've driven it a few times, and whilst its not the sharpest tool around, the box is relatively smooth as long as you don't ask too much of it. Just drift along, and all seems to be well. Boot it hard and its a bit slow to respond.
Re 2.0T engine - I've got a 2005 Liberty with this engine, single turbo, 180kW/245bhp. Currently on 190k km and seems to be in rude health. Regular servicing is a must with these. In the pre-04 Forester this engine is detuned to 130kW/175bhp, so I would presume more long-lasting.
I've also had a few drives in both 2.0T and 2.5T Foresters and would agree the 2.5 is notably pokier - supposed to be 155-165kW (205-225bhp). Its still at a lower level of tune than in the WRX and Liberty, so probably less likely to fall to one of the internet problems. Seriously, these engines are like sh!t in a field over here and the cars are easy to sell - if the reputation was that bad, they'd never shift 'em. Tuning seems to be the downfall.
As for the Forester on the motorway, I've also got a 2007 Forester with the N/A 2.5 engine, which I've had from new. Cruises well at 110-120kmh and I've done a few 2500km round trips, fully laden, with a bike on the roof. Yes, its a little noisier than the Liberty, but not that off-putting. Definitely better with manual box.
Hope that lot helps
Ved said:
1. Boxes are fine and go to mega miles because...
2. They're made exceptionally well. My Impreza is on 93k and feels strong and solid. My Forester is on 122800 as is likewise. In fact I'm going to get it mapped soon to add another 60bhp because...
3. The EJ20 in the Forester (<2005) is around 170bhp and the EJ25 is 225ish. Both are generally as reliable but the latter does have HG issues but that's a simple fix by putting in some studs and a Cosworth HG.
Oh and for motorways they're all good, the legacy and outback 3.0 especially but the Forester does have a lot of wind noise from the door mirror joining the A pillar.
I'd go get this one http://www.pistonheads.com/classifieds/used-cars/s... Add some 17's, rear ARB and drop links, a good exhaust, filter and map and you'll have a wonderful car.
OP, I'm biased as have a 2.5FXT. There is a reasonable difference between the 2.0 and 2.5 turbo engines. The 2.0 puts out 176bhp, the 2.5 between 205 and 227bhp depending upon year. However, both cars are remarkable value for money and immensely capable. Don't let the tiny extra wind noise sway you, the Forester is a very good place to be. I took mine to the Alpes and back this summer, packed to the gunwales with camping gear and bikes; they eat motorway mileage with consummate ease and mountain roads even easier.2. They're made exceptionally well. My Impreza is on 93k and feels strong and solid. My Forester is on 122800 as is likewise. In fact I'm going to get it mapped soon to add another 60bhp because...
3. The EJ20 in the Forester (<2005) is around 170bhp and the EJ25 is 225ish. Both are generally as reliable but the latter does have HG issues but that's a simple fix by putting in some studs and a Cosworth HG.
Oh and for motorways they're all good, the legacy and outback 3.0 especially but the Forester does have a lot of wind noise from the door mirror joining the A pillar.
I'd go get this one http://www.pistonheads.com/classifieds/used-cars/s... Add some 17's, rear ARB and drop links, a good exhaust, filter and map and you'll have a wonderful car.
Edited by Ved on Saturday 18th October 23:06
Edited by Ved on Saturday 18th October 23:10
Dont get me wrong. The Outback is much more waft-o-matic in character but the Forester (2.5 XT in my case) is still extremely good at crushing those miles. The difference being that the Forester always feels 'ready to go' thanks to the closer DNA to the WRX.
It slso sits right on boost and ready at 80mph
It slso sits right on boost and ready at 80mph
Gassing Station | Subaru | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff