Forester 2.0 or 2.5XT?

[pup2]

I know, I know. Were price and gas not an issue, obvious na 2.5 dapat ang kunin. But a nearly 500 thou price difference, not to mention a large difference in gas consumption can be a PITA whether you can afford it or not.OTH, it will be my first AT. Kung masyadong mabagal ang acceleration, baka ma-aksidente lang ako pag nainip ako.Choices:1. Get the 2.5 and grit my teeth every time I go to the gas station or read about gas price increases.2. Get the 2.0 and modify in a year or two (kung mukhang hindi na magkaka recall) to improve throttle response and acceleration.What do you guys think? BTW, all other brands, makes, and models are out. I've eliminated them for one reason or another, unless you know of a new model coming out in the next few weeks (may reservation na nga ako sa Subaru eh).

[IMm29]

I'd get the 2.5XT, satisfy my need for speed till it dies down, (mainly perhaps due to the gas consumption) then drive conservatively. I would rather the more powerful engine that I can slow down, than the less powerful engine I'd have to flog each time just to satiate my itch to speed up.

[Horsepower]

2.5XT but try to wait, they might realize that their turbo is ancient and might upgrade it to VGT. :-)

I can hear the turbo whistle as early as 1000rpm on my CRDI VGT, if my windows are open.

[SteveMcQueen]

There's just something about the Subaru Forester. I should know; I've testdriven the 2.0 and 2.5XT. Obviously, either one can do the job of taking you from A-B. However, the 2.5XT is simply and amazingly other-worldly experience. Talk about thrill factor.

Now, I'm no teener. I'm a single, 30-something executive who has a month to go before making a big decision on what to spend for my company car entitlement. I, too, have been considering the Subaru. I'm also taking a look at a 3.0 liter V6 Accord that churns out 240HP-in the same league as the XT, but in naturally-aspirated form. Speed and performance are, obviously, important to me. I guess it's the same with you.

You're gonna be "stuck" with your car for the next 5 years or so. It's in your best interest to go with what's really important to you in choosing your next purchase. Hope this helps.

[Dr.Kamiya]

Get the 2.5XT and have it tuned at some place like Orange (EcuTek) or Autoplus.

In stock form Subaru's 2.5li turbo engines seem to run very rich (obviously for safety against bad gas). If you're diligent enough to run only high-octane Blaze or V-Power, a retune will not only get you more power, it'll also give the car much better economy.

A friend of mine has had both his STIs tuned at Orange, I'm still putting some more miles in my car, but eventually i'll get my rex tuned there too. HTH

[mazdamazda]

2.5XT but try to wait, they might realize that their turbo is ancient and might upgrade it to VGT. :-)

I can hear the turbo whistle as early as 1000rpm on my CRDI VGT, if my windows are open.

0-100kph in 6.19s

I wouldn't call that ancient. And oh, the STi version pumps out 300hp. :evillaugh

[jjmichaels]

Might as well go for the higher variant Forester already. Night and day difference! If you stay off-boost then your typical gas consumption would be as much as a 2.0 engine of let's say... ... a CRV.

This is your conscience speaking:
Stick to your initial instincts. May reservation ka na... :naughty2:

[Horsepower]

M2:

okay, i take back the "ancient" part. I'll just say, not so new. hehehee.

Seriously, if they stick VGT to it, for sure those figures will improve.

[niky]

It's the rich tuning, as Dr. Kamiya has said... not the lack of VGT.

Lots of Japanese turbo cars are tuned pretty rich to avoid engine problems under boost. Heck, my car isn't a turbo, and it reads pig-rich on the dyno! (Lambda at redline is 0.75... worse than an Evo!)

If you buy a 2.5 XT locally, you can bring it to places like Speedlab or Autotechnika and have it chipped or remapped. This will give you more power, a smoother powerband, and better fuel efficiency... if done right.

Turbocharged engines can give you decent fuel efficiency if you drive them with a light foot... a friend gets 10 km/l on his turbocharged car (same engine as mine) because he drives nicely and has his fuel map optimized.

Whether it'll make up for the difference in economy due to the fact that the non-turbo car is 500cc smaller, I don't know.

Like brubeck said in his thread... just buy the one that'll make you smile every time you see it in the morning...

And if you eventually find gas too expensive, sell ride tickets for your car.

[monmendoza]

Hello Niky,
Why do you need to tune a car? Is'nt the factory tune not the best setup? And what is a rich tuning? I own an sti, but honestly I don't know anything about cars. and when you remapped and rechip, woudl'nt this void your warranttee? How much this rechipping cost? And would you really noticed a perceivable difference in HP/Speed or fuel effciency when you remap? As of now my sti is averaging 6km/L using Petron Blaze city driving but i think its because I really find it so addicting to accelerate fast. Thank for the info.

[pup2]

Might as well go for the higher variant Forester already. Night and day difference! If you stay off-boost then your typical gas consumption would be as much as a 2.0 engine of let's say... ... a CRV.

This is your conscience speaking:
Stick to your initial instincts. May reservation ka na... :naughty2:

hahaha. I like this. Parang sa exams -- unless sure ka about changing your answer, stick to the original.

[pup2]

It's not just the gas. It's the 500K price difference din siyempre. I'm not that young so I'm not that into speed pero gusto ko OK ang throttle response at acceleration pag singit sa traffic at pag lusot sa highway.

In other words, I'd just like it to go as fast as my 2002 Civic VTi MT for the first 50 meters or so of giving it gas. If I can get the 2.0 to go that fast, OK na ako sa kaniya. Actually, kung MT yung 2.0 or with sportshift, I wouldn't even have considered the 2.5 pero when I found it had neither, natakot ako kasi mainipin ako minsan. The last AT I drove (na non-CVT) was a 2000 Taurus with a big-ass engine and I found the acceleration too slow for my taste!

Pero I'm thinking ano kaya if after a year or so I put K&N filter, Iridium Sparks, and aftermarket exhaust/headers, maging kasing bilis kaya ng civic ko pag-accelerate?

[mazdamazda]

Given your requirements, the 2.0L would be more than sufficient for your needs.

Plus, Subaru's 2.0L engine has the highest hp output among compact SUVs AFAIK.

[niky]

Supposedly high, but mated to AWD, AT and a big body, it's still going to be very slow compared to that VTi on initial pick-up, but it should have better mid-range grunt.

By the way, don't go to the Autofocus show. There's a Forester Turbo there for test-driving, and Carlo's positively gushing about it. Test-driving that might sway your decision...

Hello Niky,
Why do you need to tune a car? Is'nt the factory tune not the best setup? And what is a rich tuning? I own an sti, but honestly I don't know anything about cars. and when you remapped and rechip, woudl'nt this void your warranttee? How much this rechipping cost? And would you really noticed a perceivable difference in HP/Speed or fuel effciency when you remap? As of now my sti is averaging 6km/L using Petron Blaze city driving but i think its because I really find it so addicting to accelerate fast. Thank for the info.

Well, there are two schools of thought... no, heck, opinions are across the board.

But in all honesty... stock factory tuning is not the best in terms of power and economy. Stock factory tuning is designed around compromises... noise requirements, durability requirements, emissions requirements, cost requirements, etcetera...

To meet some of these requirements, factory ECUs often err on the rich side, meaning, more fuel in proportion to air than the ideal "stoich" (wait, I've got to look up the spelling...) ...errh stoichiometric ratio (the ratio at which fuel and air achieve perfect combustion)... When an engine runs "rich", extra fuel is injected for the sole purpose of cooling down the combustion chambers, to avoid detonation, overheating, and the like. You can tell it's running rich by the smell of gasoline at the tailpipe.

Rich isn't bad... in fact, for turbo engines, it's vital to run slightly rich. But running too rich is. That's why some manufacturers specify ECU remapping for some car models, because they've found out their stock maps are much too rich. Or sometimes, not rich enough (which leads to engine problems... ala Chevrolet? At least, that's a theory for some of their busted engines...). There's also an explanation here for why the Khaos Fuel Saver might work for some (because it leans out the fuel-air mixture), but is still very dangerous for most (because it's unmetered and non-application specific).

Also, stock maps aren't always fully optimised. Which is why some manufacturers can offer a "sports edition" of a car with more power, without changing very much. (My car is an example... additional 10hp from a different ECU... confirmed by guys swapping ECUs and performing dyno-tests)

A remap will not only help achieve a better fuel-air balance, it'll optimize your powerband, leading to smoother running (no hesitation or dips in the power) and hopefully, better consumption. How much extra power and how much better in terms of fuel depends on how good the tuner is.

You can do this via an Air-fuel controller (Autoplus), piggyback (available at Speedlab) or via ECU-remapping (at Autotechnika). A piggyback ECU will give you the MOST options in terms of tunability... an ECU-remap will help keep your warranty (as long as you don't add anything else to the engine).

These things are expensive, though... at 30,000 pesos (average) for these various options, it's often the last thing to do when modifying. But if all you want is some extra "oomph" (say, about 15-30 hp with your WRX) without the extra noise of a new exhaust or a warranty-voiding new turbine (Speedlab has the new Garrett GT28RS! It spins like it weighs nothing!), it's not bad.

Be warned... modifying is kinda addictive... you might end up buying more stuff. If you do end up buying the whole shebang from Speedlab, tell Sidney he owes me a free camber kit... hehe.

[Jun aka Pekto]

Well, if we applied all that logic from the "How Much Hp Is Enough for RP" thread, then the Forester 2.0 should have an abundance of hp. Plenty enough for most situations. He He.

At least I said 200hp and I stick by that. Turbo (2.5XT) for me.

[niky]

But the thing is... why accept the fuel consumption penalty of having an AWD rally-car...errrh... truck, if you don't have the grunt to compensate for it?

[monmendoza]

Thanks Niky, very informative. I learned something new today.

Supposedly high, but mated to AWD, AT and a big body, it's still going to be very slow compared to that VTi on initial pick-up, but it should have better mid-range grunt.

By the way, don't go to the Autofocus show. There's a Forester Turbo there for test-driving, and Carlo's positively gushing about it. Test-driving that might sway your decision...



Well, there are two schools of thought... no, heck, opinions are across the board.

But in all honesty... stock factory tuning is not the best in terms of power and economy. Stock factory tuning is designed around compromises... noise requirements, durability requirements, emissions requirements, cost requirements, etcetera...

To meet some of these requirements, factory ECUs often err on the rich side, meaning, more fuel in proportion to air than the ideal "stoich" (wait, I've got to look up the spelling...) ...errh stoichiometric ratio (the ratio at which fuel and air achieve perfect combustion)... When an engine runs "rich", extra fuel is injected for the sole purpose of cooling down the combustion chambers, to avoid detonation, overheating, and the like. You can tell it's running rich by the smell of gasoline at the tailpipe.

Rich isn't bad... in fact, for turbo engines, it's vital to run slightly rich. But running too rich is. That's why some manufacturers specify ECU remapping for some car models, because they've found out their stock maps are much too rich. Or sometimes, not rich enough (which leads to engine problems... ala Chevrolet? At least, that's a theory for some of their busted engines...). There's also an explanation here for why the Khaos Fuel Saver might work for some (because it leans out the fuel-air mixture), but is still very dangerous for most (because it's unmetered and non-application specific).

Also, stock maps aren't always fully optimised. Which is why some manufacturers can offer a "sports edition" of a car with more power, without changing very much. (My car is an example... additional 10hp from a different ECU... confirmed by guys swapping ECUs and performing dyno-tests)

A remap will not only help achieve a better fuel-air balance, it'll optimize your powerband, leading to smoother running (no hesitation or dips in the power) and hopefully, better consumption. How much extra power and how much better in terms of fuel depends on how good the tuner is.

You can do this via an Air-fuel controller (Autoplus), piggyback (available at Speedlab) or via ECU-remapping (at Autotechnika). A piggyback ECU will give you the MOST options in terms of tunability... an ECU-remap will help keep your warranty (as long as you don't add anything else to the engine).

These things are expensive, though... at 30,000 pesos (average) for these various options, it's often the last thing to do when modifying. But if all you want is some extra "oomph" (say, about 15-30 hp with your WRX) without the extra noise of a new exhaust or a warranty-voiding new turbine (Speedlab has the new Garrett GT28RS! It spins like it weighs nothing!), it's not bad.

Be warned... modifying is kinda addictive... you might end up buying more stuff. If you do end up buying the whole shebang from Speedlab, tell Sidney he owes me a free camber kit... hehe.

[Fozzie Bear]

It obviously depends on what you need from your vehicle.
In my opinion I have yet to even find a single road in the Philippines which is safe enough for anything more than 50 or 60 BHP rather than the 150+ nonesense that some members seem to be raving on about here.

There is as you say a substantial difference in the initial cost as well which seems to have been forgotten about by most of the replies.

For my part, I'm just about to purchase the 2.0X after 4 months of looking for a replacement for my ageing Pajero 2.5D, and after considering Montero Sports, Strada, CRVs, X-Trails and just about every other small (and not so small) SUVs out there.

.....and before anybody says that I'm some sort of 'slow Sunday driver', my previous toy was a Honda VFR750 which accelerated faster and I drove faster than just about everybody on this forum could only dream of.....but on safe roads in UK.

[niky]

I actually posted that same opinion (mine is set at 45-75) in the "How much HP is really needed in the Philippines" thread. Kinda hypocritical, though, since I drive a 140-160 hp car.

But realistically, choosing a vehicle in this category is not all about practicality. If practicality and "good enough" were the only virtues, we'd all be driving base-level Crosswinds and Adventures.

It's all in the choice of the buyer. What will make you happy? Congrats on getting the Forester, by the way... since you have made up your mind, it's a compromise you can live with... excellent choice, by the way... most people don't realize that the Forester is a legitimate alternative to CUVs and SUVs.

But for the threadstarter, he's still got to convince himself, one way or the other, whether he prefers the lower price and (possibly) greater economy or whether he wants more power and prestige (at greater cost both now and down the line).

[Fozzie Bear]

I actually posted that same opinion (mine is set at 45-75) in the "How much HP is really needed in the Philippines" thread. Kinda hypocritical, though, since I drive a 140-160 hp car.

But realistically, choosing a vehicle in this category is not all about practicality. If practicality and "good enough" were the only virtues, we'd all be driving base-level Crosswinds and Adventures.

It's all in the choice of the buyer. What will make you happy? Congrats on getting the Forester, by the way... since you have made up your mind, it's a compromise you can live with... excellent choice, by the way... most people don't realize that the Forester is a legitimate alternative to CUVs and SUVs.

But for the threadstarter, he's still got to convince himself, one way or the other, whether he prefers the lower price and (possibly) greater economy or whether he wants more power and prestige (at greater cost both now and down the line).

I know what you mean.
In my home town of Puerto Princesa and in the surrounding area the 2.5 would have been completely unused. I could use the price difference towards re-mapping or suspension tweeks (as 1/2 of my driving is off-road or semi off-road).
A lot more people should look at the Forester as an alternative to other CUVs or SUVs. Brilliant car.