One of our vehicles is a non-turbo forester (2011) and we absolutely love it. Perfect size for two of us plus dogs. Gas mileage tends to be around that 9 or 10 l/100km on the highway for us, so not great but significantly better than our half-ton was. I'd suggest that the Crosstrek wouldn't be that much better than the Forester in terms of fuel economy.
I'd agree that the Subaru's are next to impossible to get stuck in the snow, we got some Nokian winters for it and it just goes and goes through anything.
That said, there are a few things we're not wild about that were overlooked when we purchased. Things like interior "luxuries", the Subaru's are pretty basic compared to what you get from competing brands. Coming from Chevy and Ford trucks and cars, little things like the lack of auto headlamps irritate me, and the radio and speakers are junk. The other big complaint I have is the service costs. Factory spec is synthetic oil so regular maintenance just seems to be much more expensive than domestic brands.
All told though, we'd likely buy the Subaru again as the extra cost for service is outmatched by the performance of the vehicle and my wife doesn't seem to care that much about the interior amenities and it's her ride. Plus, you see tons of Subarus out there with obscene amounts of kilometers on them so that says a lot for their reliability. With the sheer number of recalls these days; I wouldn't be in a hurry to be a chevy right now.
If your only reason for ruling the Forester out is the fuel economy, I'd suggest that you wouldn't notice a huge difference between it and the Crosstrack in the real world. Coming from a truck; the extra height and space of the Forester might feel more at home to you.
|
07-22-2014, 04:05 AM
Threaded Mode
