Subaru also claims that SI-Drive improves on mileage when it’s in Intelligent mode, but the EPA rating is based on the default, Sport, mode. For what it’s worth, the Volvo XC70 is even worse with its base engine. The EPA-estimated 24 mpg highway is what you’d expect from an SUV, but it seems low on a wagon. Being the turbo model, its extra power comes at a price. (I’ll detail Subaru Intelligent Drive later because it comes only on the 2.5 XT automatic and 3.0 R, and I don’t want to bore the other shoppers.) I took an interstate trip of close to 700 miles and was less than thrilled with the mileage. By playing with the SI-Drive feature, I found the lag to be acceptable in this regard, but it’s far from ideal. In terms of regular old driving, my Outback XT test car’s drivetrain offers spirited acceleration, though there’s a lag from a standing start - even if you floor it. The Outback does tow more, both with its four- and six-cylinder engines. Often when one vehicle is larger or rides higher than another, it burns more gas. The taller Forester has a slightly higher chance of rollover, according to federal ratings, but both have standard electronic stability systems. Both models earn Top Safety Pick designations from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.
Perhaps a long garage with only 64 inches of overhead clearance? Otherwise, the Forester is roughly the same size and turns a tighter circle. Its cargo floor is 2.2 inches higher off the ground, but neither is very high compared to some SUVs.Īpart from aesthetic preference, there are few clear reasons why one would choose the Outback over the Forester. The Outback has a slightly longer cargo area, but the Forester’s accepts taller items. As in the previous Forester generation, the main difference is shape. of volume.Īs the table reflects, the Outback starts at a higher price than the Forester but has slightly less cargo volume, and with the exception of 1 inch of front-seat legroom, it’s smaller than the Forester in all seating dimensions, including hip and shoulder room (not shown). *Maximum for model line moonroof subtracts between 1 and 3 inches and up to 5 cu. Maximum towing capacity (4-cyl./6-cyl., lbs.) ft.)Ĭargo floor length (behind backseat/seat folded, in.) ForesterĬargo volume (behind backseat/seat folded, cu. Now that a larger, redesigned Forester is on the market for 2009, the Outback is running out of selling points even among shoppers who are dead-set on a Subaru. Just a year or two ago, we pointed out that there wasn’t much difference between the Outback and the Subaru Forester, aside from price. (There’s also an Outback version of the smaller Impreza hatchback called the Impreza Outback Sport.
Little else has changed this year, though an electronic stability system is now standard, and the two higher trim levels include a premium stereo. Subaru simplified matters last year by making the Outback only a wagon, and the Legacy, on which it’s based, only a sedan.
More powerful engines come in the turbocharged 2.5 XT Limited and six-cylinder 3.0 R Limited, along with some additional convenience features not found on the other Limiteds.
Now the lineup starts with the 2.5i, 2.5i Special Edition and 2.5i Limited. This has happened gradually as the SUV market has moved away from bulky, truck-based SUVs toward lighter, more refined unibody models that are more fuel- and space-efficient yet retain the attributes many buyers have come to appreciate: all-wheel drive, additional ground clearance and the flexibility of a hatchback.įor 2009, Subaru eliminated last year’s base, Premium and L.L.Bean trim levels. Along with competing wagons like the Volvo V50 and XC70 and Volkswagen’s Passat wagon, it now faces small crossovers like the Toyota Venza, too. A longtime favorite, the Subaru Outback remains a versatile, desirable model whose greatest shortcoming is that it’s no longer unique.
0 kommentar(er)
