2007-03-01 03:27:52 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Cars & Transportation ➔ Car Makes ➔ Subaru
Both are nice but I would go with the outback. Both are nice to drive, good handling and safe. The AWD system is the same on both. Head room is good in both. The forester is taller and shorter wheelbase. The outback has a longer wheelbase that gives you are smoother ride. I would suggest you take both for a good test drive and see which one would fit your needs best. The Forester has a base 2.5 litre 4 cylinder engine that gives 173 HP. The Out back the same. You can get a turbo on both models which give around 250 hp or the Outback has a 6 cylinder which can give the same 250 hp. Good Luck!
2007-03-01 08:50:40 · answer #1 · answered by ? 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I went in looking for a Forester, fully expecting to buy one. I had been driving a Honda Accord for about 8 years, though, and I found the Forester and its short wheelbase to be a bit TOO much like a small truck for my tastes. I really wanted a small wagon/SUV to carry band equipment and other things, so I was kind of sold on the IDEA of a Forester. As I was headed into the showroom to talk price, I noticed an Outback sitting there with all the doors and the hatch open. It has virtually the same cargo capacity (1 sq ft less than the Forester), but the thing is SO much more like a car that the Forester. I drove it and decided that this was much better suited for me.
I have had an Outback since June, 2006, but I've already owned two of them. I bought the 2.5 first, thinking I'd be just fine with 175 HP, but after 8 years with a 200 HP V-6 in a Honda Accord, I just thought I was beating the 4-cylinder to death. Not that it isn't made to take it, though. In January, 2007, I got the 3.0 LL Bean Outback. Overall, I'd easily say that the Outback 3.0 is on par with the 1999 Accord 3.0 that I had. It's is a very good car unless you are looking for a rolling living room like a Buick or a Lincoln. The AWD, VDC, TCS and all those other letters are a really good set-up, too. It is a very smooth engine and it sounds great when you push it a bit.
I had the 2.5 for 7 months and I've had the 3.0 for 5 days. (My daughter is now the proud owner of my 2006 Outback 2.5.) I think the upgrade was well worthwhile. There is SO much more about this car that is better than the 2.5i. If you can find one, buy it.
~~~~~
Not that it matters, but I see Subaru USA sold 59,262 Outback's last year and 51,258 Forester's.
2007-03-01 06:46:44 · answer #2 · answered by Picture Taker 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I own a 1999 Subaru Forester it has 265,000 miles and I love it. I am currently in the market for the 3.0 Outback, its a really nice car and I agree with Dr. Sam.
Good luck
2007-03-04 14:10:09 · answer #3 · answered by AC 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I have the Outback and it's the best car I have ever owned.
2007-03-01 03:39:08 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would buy which ever has the better crash test results and the most safety featurs. Personally, I like the Outback better. Happy shopping!
2007-03-01 03:32:34 · answer #5 · answered by tcg7213 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I own a 2006 Forester. Best car I have ever owned.
2007-03-01 13:48:42 · answer #6 · answered by mastrobuono1029@verizon.net 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Outback because it has more power under the hood.
2007-03-03 14:44:24 · answer #7 · answered by Matt 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I have an outback wagon I'll sell you... only 176k on it and no rust! Goes like a rocket!
2007-03-03 12:59:22 · answer #8 · answered by nick b 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Depends on the size of your penis. Do you want fashion or function?
I've driven both. Both will do the same thing quite well. At same model level, the Forrester will do the same thing as the Outback at a cheaper price.
.
2007-03-01 13:10:00 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
Ask the dealer if it comes with a coupon for 10 free head gaskets
2007-03-03 01:51:48 · answer #10 · answered by Delphi 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋