Love my 2016 forester! Just waiting for them to come out with a hybrid version. Why is taking so long?

I currently have a Forester and it’s too small. Backseat is adequate for two teens, but that’s all. 3 adult sized people? Forget it. No way. And when four of us are in the car, plus hockey gear, there’s literally zero room for anything else.

Should’ve bought the Outback instead.

My masculinity is not threatened by driving a station wagon. Your H may be less secure, I dunno.

Anonymous wrote:My family used to buy Subaru brand, but despite their reputation for being long lived, always had expensive repairs as they got to around 80,000. Mechanic said that was normal. Switched to Honda CRV and very pleased - as long as do all the recommended maintenance, over 200,000 miles with zero breakdowns or expensive repairs. Might want to consider Honda suv.

Recently bought a new Forester. Did look at the CRV but the interior finish part struck me as cheap. It too has CVT transmission and some issues in prior years with that.

Anonymous wrote:Forester has much better headroom. If you have a passenger over six feet, Forester has a significant advantage.

I’m surprised to hear this bc when we test drove it in 2015, it was a small backseat...

I have 2010 (75kmiles) and 2019 forester (15k miles). No problems for except for general maintenance done by dealer.

2021 Forester owner here. Did not drive the Outback...it looks too much like a SW. Love the Forester. Fun to drive, good gas mileage, plenty of visibility. EPA says 30 on average. So far the mileage is 38 on the highway, 30 around town. YMMV.

Anonymous wrote:Forester has much better headroom. If you have a passenger over six feet, Forester has a significant advantage.

This is why we went with it too. I also wasn’t crazy about the Outback’s wagon appearance.

We have an Outback. It has a noticeably wider back seat than the Forester. This is important if you’re dealing with car seats.

Forester has much better headroom. If you have a passenger over six feet, Forester has a significant advantage.

I'm at 70k miles with my Forester and only standard maintenance so far. Some of it's expensive (brakes) but nothing inappropriate for the age and level of use. No breakdowns, knock wood. They used to have transmission issues but I'm told that's fixed in models newer than 2012.

I like the Outback but preferred the height and cost of the Forester. At the time (2015) I also test dove the CR-V, Highlander, and a Mazda. Of those I liked the CR-V best after the Forester. Our other car is a Toyota and has endless repair needs: I don't plan to buy a Toyota again.

We have had three Subarus that have made it past 200,000 miles with no expensive repairs- just regular maintenance items. We have another one right now that is pushing 100,000 and is also extremely reliable.

I think our experience is pretty typical for Subaru owners.

To answer your question, either one is great, but I always think the Forester is just more fun to drive.

Anonymous wrote:Outback is a foot longer than the Forrester. So roomier interior but harder to park.

This is why we chose forester. It was plenty roomy.

Outback is a foot longer than the Forrester. So roomier interior but harder to park.

My family used to buy Subaru brand, but despite their reputation for being long lived, always had expensive repairs as they got to around 80,000. Mechanic said that was normal. Switched to Honda CRV and very pleased - as long as do all the recommended maintenance, over 200,000 miles with zero breakdowns or expensive repairs. Might want to consider Honda suv.

The Forester is more in my price range. But I like the Outback more.

The Forester also has a history of reliability challenges.

Has anyone had both? Care to compare?