Forester vs Outback
|
John Butler wrote:According to my mechanic, the later Foresters have a better head gasket than the one used on the Outback. That better gasket will save you a couple of grand if you own a Forester long enough. He said its because the Forester 2.4 might get a turbo strapped on. So the non-turbo Forester won't have the typical Subaru head gasket problem.Your mechanic either hasn't had a non turbo and turbo motor next to each other, or didn't notice the part numbers they ordered. Up until 06 the coolant passages between the single overhead cam and dual overhead cam (turbo) motors were the same. After that the patterns are different, you can not interchange the turbo and non turbo gaskets past 2007 model year. However Subaru has switched to MLS (multi layer steel) gaskets, like the turbo models have, for all of their motors after about 09. When I ordered new headgaskets for 2000 outback the old graphite/composite/coolant weeping pile of shit gasket part number had been superseded for an MLS gasket. If you're buying an older subaru that has had the headgaskets replaced make sure they are MLS. |
|
I got a Forester over an Outback just because I have a taller dog...but one thing I wish I knew before getting the Forester is that since it is an all wheel drive vehicle, when one tire goes out, you need to replace all 4 or you run the risk of messing up the transmission. I still would have got the Subaru with the prior knowledge, but I was a little in shock when I found out the hard way. Note, if your tires are relatively new, you can get away with just replacing the one that went flat. |
|
Being a former Subaru mechanic I can tell you the Outback is alot easier to work on than the Forester if thats of any interest |
|
To me there really is such a little difference between the Forester and Outback. Buy the one you like. If you're buying new, no question I would pay for Subaru's Eyesight package. I find the adaptive cruise control pretty amazing. |
|
Juana wrote:I got a Forester over an Outback just because I have a taller dog...but one thing I wish I knew before getting the Forester is that since it is an all wheel drive vehicle, when one tire goes out, you need to replace all 4 or you run the risk of messing up the transmission. I still would have got the Subaru with the prior knowledge, but I was a little in shock when I found out the hard way. Note, if your tires are relatively new, you can get away with just replacing the one that went flat.It is still possible to add new tire to the used set, but the tire needs to be shaved - some shop can do that for you |
|
I blow up a twin air mattress on my 12 outback. |
|
Good to know amarius! Thank you |
|
I have a 2015 Forester 2.5i. It is by far a superior off-roader compared to the late model Outback, which was my primary reason for purchasing it. Should have gone turbo, but at least I have the manual transmission which is entertaining. |
|
As this thread is still going... |
|
Mathias wrote:I had the head gasket and various other parts replaced at 150K. I knew someone who had to do it before 90K.Forester/Outback switched over to FB25 engine, ~2011. I follow, sort of, forums, head gasket issues do not, routinely, crop up on FB25, it was a problem for EJ25 engine. Since Subaru went gangbusters on making the FB25 efficient, there is a problem with rings on early FB25s, some engines experience excessive oil burn, IIRC this was resolved for 2015? There was class action against Subaru for that. Replacing engine parts at 150k is routine - people in the know advise water pumps, alternators, etc. Keep in mind, service/oil change interval is 6k miles for 2016 Forester - you WILL burn some oil. BTW, it was 7.5k for previous models, which definitely guarantees need for top-offs. |
|
I'd get the Outback if you mean the model formerly known as Legacy - it has more room, and with the H6 engine decent performance, plus you can almost sleep in the back of the Outback - with the tailgate open. Someone asked about off-road capabilities - the answer to that question is zero when all things are considered. |
|
Contrary to some other opinions, I think there is a big difference between the Outback and the Forester. I have a 2009 Outback which I LOVE. In my opinion, this was the last year that utility trumped luxury in the designs. The 2015 Outbacks are much roomier for the occupants at the expense of cargo space. I'd rather take a long roadtrip in a newer Outback, but when it comes to hauling a pile of gear around and sleeping in the back, I would choose my 2009 every time. |
|
Mathias wrote:Perhaps someone can comment as to what exactly causes the head gasket issue. Regular running high RPMs, or running high before the engine is warm? Running with low oil?For head gaskets the problem years were from 1995-2001. The EJ25D and EJ251 that came in the legacy, forester and some imprezas had the issues. I rally older imprezas and have put several of these engines into the ground. There is not much you can do driving wise to keep the head gaskets from blowing as they just get old and the coating on the gasket cracks and flakes over the years. Most older Subarus burn oil. A quart between changes is pretty standard. However, if you are putting in 2-3 quarts between changes the piston rings are probably going and you are getting blowby. Using non-synthetic can help a little with oil consumption but if you get 200k out of one of the older engines you are doing pretty good. |
|
Mathias wrote:Perhaps someone can comment as to what exactly causes the head gasket issue.A very shitty headgasket. Install a new MLS (multi layer steel) gasket and you will not have problems. On any make/model if you run low on coolant and/or significantly overheat you can warp the cylinder head and blow the gasket. On the subject of oil burning, in the subaru motors I've rebuilt I've frequently found the piston rings pretty well gummed up with sludge. When the rings aren't floating freely on the piston they won't seal well to the wall, you'll get more combustion chamber gas down in the crankcase and a lot more oil consumption. Some oils are better about this than others, but the flat cylinder layout not naturally helping oil drain back to the crankcase certainly doesn't help the cause. Running a TRUE synthetic oil with an ester base stock (ie redline) will avoid or greatly minimize this, but that stuff is damn expensive and it will take ages to clean out the sludged up rings. The best product I've found for cleaning up sludge and freeing ring lands is auto-RX. auto-rx.com/ Sadly the companies website is a bit over the top and makes it sound like snake oil, but I originally tried it base on the recommendation of a friend who is in an engineer working in lubrication/fluids for heavy equipment. The bottom line though was that it works, combustion pressure results on one car really stood out. I had an Evo 8 that used for commuting, but also did track days in. At 90k it was burning around 2 quarts in 4k miles and compression was in the mid 140 range. I did two runs of the auto RX and then retested after the second "rinse" phase. Compression was back up above 160 on all cylinders, back to new factory spec. Oil consumption went down to a half quart every 3k. You won't see results that impressive with any subaru motor, the cylinder walls on those engines just wear faster and you'll always have some oil burn with mileage. On my current outback it did drop consumption by a quart over 4k change intervals though.
|
|
Both good cars to learn about head gasket replacement. |
|
Not sure how this company has gotten away with selling majorly defective goods for so long. But what really boggles my mind is how many people want one! |
|
Can anyone comment on towing for either Forester or Outback? According to the specs, it looks like the Forester can tow 1500 pounds and the Outback 2500. Seems like this would make it a lot more feasible to have a little camper behind an Outback. But I've never towed anything and would definitely appreciate some insight. |
|
Mark E Dixon wrote:Can anyone comment on towing for either Forester or Outback? According to the specs, it looks like the Forester can tow 1500 pounds and the Outback 2500. Seems like this would make it a lot more feasible to have a little camper behind an Outback. But I've never towed anything and would definitely appreciate some insight.My favorite source of semi-official info on Subarus is cars101.com Here is their opinion of towing with Forester - The 2014 and 2015 is rated to tow up to 1500 pounds. And even that would be a lot to tow behind the a 2.5L model because they have no transmission control or Paddle Shifters. Previous Foresters (2013, 2012, 2011 etc) were rated at 2400 pounds. The 2.0XT turbo model would be a better choice with its paddle shifters, though the turbo engine would be boosted most of the time when towing which isn't particularly desirable. The lack of paddle shifters on the 2.5s of course means the Forester is a not a good choice for anything other than infrequent, light towing. People who tow, know that transmission control is key to their safety and vehicle performance - whether slowing on a downgrade, pulling up a hill, or pulling a boat up a steep ramp for example. In a side wind or bumpy road with the trailer swaying, the experienced tower doesn't want to just hit the brakes, instead they know to gradually downshift to maintain stability and safely control the trailer and vehicle. The computer managed Low mode is the only choice the driver has other than Drive, and Low mode simply doesn't give the driver any transmission choices. And Outback, the higher towing value is only with trailer brakes 2.5L 4 cylinder, 200 lb tongue weight 2700 pounds with trailer brakes. 1000 pounds without trailer brakes. over 104* F when towing up a long hill max weight should be 1350 pounds. Replace the CVT oil at app 24855 miles if towing. 3.6L 6 cylinder- 200 lb tongue weight 3000 pounds with trailer brakes, 1000 pounds without trailer brakes. Over 104* F or when towing up a long hill max weight should be 1500 pounds. |
|
amarius wrote: My favorite source of semi-official info on Subarus is cars101.com Here is their opinion of towing with Forester - The lack of paddle shifters on the 2.5s of course means the Forester is a not a good choice for anything other than infrequent, light towing.I like most of what's on the website, but I think the paddle shifter vs Low mode is a bit overblown. In most cases, the Low mode (holding the engine @ 4K rpm or so) is more versatile than fixed gears (we are talking about a CVT here) for descent control. Even with 6 simulated speeds, I find myself between gears a lot. But the point about changing CVT oil is a biggie: this is something that can only be serviced at the dealer (involve gradually bring the oil up to temp on a dyno & slowly adding to the exact amount. I'm not sure how much it costs, but that'll add significant cost to towing. |
|
With all the CVT and paddle shifter nonsense, especially with towing, it boggles my mind that companies are phasing out manual transmissions as an option. I made like 4 trips from NY to NC towing maxed-out trailers with my '05 Forester 5MT and had zero issues. |