Forester vs. Vue vs. ???

[Hags]

Mind your bussiness Snowy, I am just feeding information on diff. cars and 4X4's

[awebber]

Hey guys, this is the Forester vs Vue topic, I'm trying to buy a vehicle here!  There's a place for the insults, that would be the Forester vs X-Trail topic.

Okay I'm kidding but please wait until I buy my vehicle before scaring everyone away. Here I was excited that the topic was up to 19 posts, only to discover three links to stories of the same Vue recall and a review of the X-Trail.

=aw

[Snowman]

Okay Hag….where is the info on the Forester XT?...like you know…Vue vs. Foreater..How did the X-Trail end up here?

[Hags]

There is for Saturn VUE but they don't have it for Subaru Forester.

http://www.velocityjrnl.com/jrnl/2005/vmd11675ov.html

[Hags]

Snowy; Post 110 is for all VUE
Post; 111 all for 4X4 info
Post 112 is an e-mail to me from Germany from the same guy which I posted for 4X4's
Post; 113, 2 for VUE, 1 for Equinox
Post; 115 for VUE.

I can not find much info for Forester except crush tests.
Happy now

[Hags]

Here is an article;

Summary

2004 Subaru Forester 2.5XT engine
© Subaru  
Three compact sport-utilities stand atop the competition when it comes to mistakes NOT made (no tailgate-mounted spare tire, no fingernail-breaking flip-lid door handles, etc). They're the Hyundai Santa Fe, Ford Escape and Subaru Forester. Of the three, the 2004 Subaru Forester XT is the least stylish but the best performer. It does what competitors can do -- only faster. It's a good family hauler around town, but a blast to drive fast in the mountains. Ready torque means you pass with right-now urgency. The turbocharger spools up in a heartbeat. There's no noticable lag. Handling doesn't match performance, but is more than sufficient for anyone driving any sport-utility, a model configuration that simply cannot handle on a par with cars due to the basic design. Besides, the comfort level is more important here. If performance and/or safety is near the top of your list, and a sport-utility is your need, then the clear choice is the 2004 Subaru Forester 2.5XT.

[Hags]

Some more for Subaru;

http://www.autosite.com/Previews/2005-subaru-forester.asp

http://www.channel4.com/4car/road-tests/driving-impressions-2004/S/subaru/forest er/xt.html

[Hags]

HAVE A GOOD NIGHT AND SWEET DREAMS!

[Snowman]

http://cars.about.com/cs/testdrives/fr/forester_tst.htm
http://www.epinions.com/content_104292322948
http://research.cars.com/go/crp/summary.jsp?makeid=45&year=2004&bg=t&modelid=130 6
http://www.epinions.com/auto_Make-2003_Subaru_Forester/display_~reviews
http://cruisin.redding.com/stories/20030923hold146.shtml
http://www.dealtime.com/xPC-Subaru_2004_Subaru_Forester
http://www.autofieldguide.com/driven/0404dri19.html
http://www.intellichoice.com/reports/vehicleReport/vehicle_nmb/11091/year/2004/m ake/Subaru/model/Forester
http://www.whatcar.co.uk/RoadTest_Summary.asp?DL=0&RT=183415
http://www.autobytel.com/content/research/detail/Subaru/Subaru-Forester\2004Fo rester-2.5-XT-Premium.htm
http://www.autoweb.lycos.com/content/research/reviews/index.cfm/action/ListCTD/M ake_vch/Subaru/Model_vch/Forester
http://www.car-buying-strategies.com/2004/2004-Subaru-Outback-Wagon.html
http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/jedlicka.aspx?make=Subaru&model=Forester&src=
http://www.truckworld.com/Sport-Utility/04_subaru_forester_xt/04-forester_xt.htm l
http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2003/09/04/168055.html

[ovr50]

Jasus Christos !!!!!!!!!!!!!! Get me a beer or 12...........

[Hags]

Snowy; This is from your site you posted

http://www.whatcar.co.uk/RoadTest_Comparison.asp

[saint_satan]

I think I just figured out that Hags likes his X-Trail.  I'm glad - you'll be paying of that debt for quite a while.

http://www.canadiandriver.com/articles/jc/97-01cherokee.htm

Sorry, could resist.....

[awebber]

Thanks for all the links, I'm working my way through them.

Can anyone comment on the validity of Forester's claims to have more cargo space than the bigger Vue?

Any other vehicles in the Forester's class (AWD wagon-type things with slightly raised driver's position?

Thanks!
=aw

[Mdxtasy]

On the internet...you will find a ton of articles that will give both the positive and negative side of everything.  Apparently, you guys have found most of them.  Holy crap......Google does have it's drawbacks.  

Cargo space measured by cubic feet is at times misleading.  Some cargo areas are longer than they are tall.....resulting in a good cubic ft number and some are taller than they are long, resulting in an equally good number.  Depending on what you plan on hauling, one may suit you better.  Also, the opening to the cargo area is important...ensuring that it's tall and wide enough to allow larger items to fit into the vehicle.  

[awebber]

Good point, I really should go back and measure with a tape (if it matters; perhaps it's enough to know they're "roughly the same" without worry about a few L either way).

My 1991 Explorer is (was) notorious for having a lovely 4x6' cargo area but 47.5" maximum opening in the rear window.

=aw

[Hags]

Mdxtasy;  
Why do you thing I am pushing this hard, bc. I have Google shares

By the way good exp. for the cargo space.

[Hags]

SS I like X-Trail bc. it looks like Cherokee
FYI; I Don't owe almost anything on the X-Trail, I had some spare and got the rest from bank, prime + 1/2,

[Hags]

AW; Have you considered Honda Pilot and Toyota Highlander, they are nice too.

[random006]

I once had a computer
To bring knowledge to the fore,
They said "google me this and "google me that"
I said "I'll find your lore!"
Then a wise man came to me asked me one word
That word was "Why?"
I clicked and I searched, yet no answer came.
Now I google no more.

[awebber]

I did try the Highlander and something didn't feel right about it, I don't remember what.  Same with the Pilot.  Maybe I need to revisit those again.

=aw