mattg

thats quicker than a wrx.

for some reason, i feel depressed now.

losing to one of those will be like getting beat up by a lesbian. :o

http://caranddriver.com/article.asp?...&page_number=1

gdubb

Holy Shit

h2o467

That's a great comparison.

Titand19

I'm gonna tell my pops to get that. he's looking for a car to replace our old school camry wagon.

Guru

bah

Nashua_Night_Hawk

seems fishy!.. 235 lbft of and max of 210 HP and faster than CLS-6!!.. After 100 MPH.. this thing is dead!

darrinb

yea, it does have a very low trap speed for 13.7

KCPreki11

Yea, but also think of the possibilities of this car, just freeing up the turbo should do wonders.

NOVAwhiteTypeS

hot damn turbo's

dfv3.2CL-S

iTrader: (1)

That's a joke! Car and drive is full of crap. MT issue under the first drive compares the Baja and the Forester with same turbo engine. The estimate 0-60 number was mid 8 sec for both. it impossible that piece of crap will be quickeer than our CL-S

Beltfed

The times are wrong........its not nearly that fast stock.

Titand19

Whatever, I'll tell my pops to get it so we can have 2 turbo cars in the family

CLovis

it is legit. the car was launched hard, and thats why it has low ET and low trapspeed.

CLosiv

mattg

i'm afraid you may be wrong this time, unless all this information is incorrect.

i wish you were right.

Subaru Forester 2.5XT
With a new turbocharged engine, a real hood scoop, and a slick new interior, this is the SUV version of the WRX STi. Almost.

C/D TEST RESULTS

ACCELERATION (Seconds)
Zero to 30 mph: 1.3
40 mph: 2.6
50 mph: 3.6
60 mph: 5.3
70 mph: 6.9
80 mph: 9.2
90 mph: 11.8
100 mph: 15.0
110 mph: 19.5
120 mph: 26.7
Street start, 5-60 mph: 6.3
Top-gear acceleration, 30-50 mph: 8.4
50-70 mph: 8.1
Standing 1/4-mile: 13.8 sec @ 97 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 129 mph


price as tested, $25,520. subaru is tearing shit up.

bullaculla

must've had an awesome 60 foot time.

mattg

i would guess 1.5 - 1.6

Bluto

I've been searching sube forums. Can't find anyone who has taken their's to the track.

:o I like it a lot. :o


At 13.8, that thing could serve up more embarrassment then McD serves burgers.

hemants

Nice!

But before I'd buy one I'd want to know:

1. slalom times/skidpad (those things are tall)

2. how the interior looks (I'm spoiled by luxury)

ferizzo

I'm sure it did those times but I have a hard time believing that those horsepower and torque figures can produce a 13.8 @97. Most how light is that car? I guess like some have said it must have been launched like a motha!

Scrib

Is that time really possible with that kind of a trap speed? That 60ft time must have been in the mid-1s...

Something seems fishy.

n00dleboy

That does seem fishy especially if those numbers are to the crank and plus the extra loss to the wheels due to the AWD, you're looking at LESS hp and LESS tq to the wheels plus i bet that SUV is not light either at least 3300+ lbs. No way it could put those numbers out.

danny25

i don't see how it could be faster than a WRX when it only has 18 more ft/lbs of torque, but weighs more and has 17 fewer hp. Unless it's just geared for acceleration.

scalbert

If beat on and the weather cooperated it might be able to acheive those numbers. Looking at the specs it is geared to pull down low; you shift twice before 60MPH. But as seen, the trap is low compared to the ET so it's whole advantage comes by way of a hard launch. So with AWD and decent torque this thing would pull off some excellent short times:

DRIVETRAIN
Transmission: 5-speed manual
Final-drive ratio: 4.44:1, limited slip
Gear ... Ratio ... Mph/1000 rpm ... Max. test speed
I ... 3.45 ... 4.9 ... 32 mph (6500 rpm)
II ... 2.06 ... 8.3 ... 54 mph (6500 rpm)
III ... 1.45 ... 11.8 ... 76 mph (6500 rpm)
IV ... 1.09 ... 15.6 ... 102 mph (6500 rpm)
V ... 0.78 ... 21.8 ... 129 mph (5900 rpm)

DIMENSIONS AND CAPACITIES
Wheelbase: 99.4 in
Track, F/R: 58.9/58.5 in
Length: 175.2 in
Width: 68.3 in
Height: 65.0 in
Ground clearance: 7.5 in
Curb weight: 3289 lb
Weight distribution, F/R: 56.6/43.4%
Fuel capacity: 15.9 gal
Oil capacity: 5.0 qt
Water capacity: 7.8 qt

Black CL-S 4-Life

Great another car that will smoke my ass from a stop.

Tom2

Well, at least CLovis and Scalbert have a brain....

The rest of you non-believers are either stupid or in denial.

Fact of the matter is that the trap speed is NOT low for the ET, especially on an AWD vehicle. Basically, the car is able to use all of it's power without wasting any of it as wheelspin.

My AWD Eclipse used to run 13.20's at 103 MPH. Why was it trapping at 103 when it was nearly in the 12's? Simple- The traction/hard launch of AWD.

I've been waiting for someone to post about this Forester.....the Car and Driver issue has been out for more than a week now.

Face the facts, CL owners-- stock for stock, a Subaru Forester can piss all over the CL Type-S. And don't forget that the Forester will be VERY easy to make MUCH faster.

SleekSilver

that is really scary... getting beat by a forester is pretty bad even if its a turbo. Subaru is getting its shit together, honda needs a twin turbo V6 CRV now... OOHHH YEEEAAA

Beltfed

Here is what C & D had to say about the Turbo Forester...

The engine is the 2.5L from the regular Forester with a Mitsubishi Heavy Industries turbo putting out 11.6 psi. Different turbo entirely than the STi engine and a few psi less boost.

Subaru is claming 210 hp @ 5600 rpm and 235 lb-ft @ 3600 rpm. Curb weight is listed as 3289 lbs. Looks like it's geared fairly low which would help explain the times.

C & D reported a time of 6.3 seconds for the 5-60 mph street start, as posted.

Now surely C&D beat it up a bit to squeeze 5.3 seconds to 60. They did the same thing to get 5.4 seconds out of the original WRX when they first tested it.

So you probably won't get 0-60 in 5.3 seconds that easily, but it appears that it can be done when the conditions are right.

Remember C & D is known for posting ridiculous numbers.

Beltfed

If the times are correct, its not only going to piss on a CL Type S......it can piss on cars costing $60k plus.

Who gives a shit, you can get a Gremlin to run 10s in the quarter. Doesn't mean I would trade the Viper for a half dozen 10 second Gremlins.

Nashua_Night_Hawk

Ah, Imagine a new owner taking his new station wagon to the strip and doing a best of 15.0 @ 92 MPH... he would pissed at the loss of 1.2s to 1/4 mile.

Shawn S

Nice specs and performance.

Too bad it’s an ugly 4-Door station wagon. :thumbsdn: :thumbsdn: :thumbsdn:

Shawn S

Tom2

You're absolutely right... I wouldn't trade either.

But the fact remains that there are plenty of people in THIS segment (meaning cars with a similar price and performance as the CL-S) that will be PISSED that a $25,000 station wagon made by Subaru, can eat their lunch

It's even worse than than being smacked around by that shitty little Dodge Neon SRT whatever..... At least the Neon isn't a WAGON!

scalbert

My Typhoon would pull off the same ET but at about 1 - 2 MPH slower. It gets hard to push that bread truck through the air at the higher speeds!!

I don't about the Forester pissing all over a CL-S6. I use the 6-Speed CL since the Forester was also a manual. If launched hard then Forester would pull out ahead while the CL would be playing catch up the entire 1320 run. If launched easily the CL would be able to pull away through the entire run.

Tom2

Exactly. So the moral of the story-- If you're driving in your CL-S and you come across a kid in a Forester looking for a race, make sure to race him from a rolling start

Sorta like the way the 350Z beat up on that Cayenne Turbo

Ray Khan

I would think a tad higher on an oem clutch. I would think 1.8-2.0. Either way, the power must be grossly underrated. I don't think a 3250 lbs 210 hp awd car can trap 97 mph. I don't dispute the times, I just think subbie is pulling a fast one.

Chaptorial

There's going to be a lot of unsuspecting people out there getting their ass handed to them by that wagon.

clscls6s

No kidding - it's like the ultimate sleeper. Especially in nice drab colors.

dbox

fucking crazy.

i'm laughing just thinking about the PISSED mustang owners.

F23A4

Well, I entered the specs for the 2.5XT on Cartest v4.5 and my results differed GREATLY from C/D, with a 1/4 mile of 16.4@90.5mph NOT 13.8@97mph.

CLovis

ok guys NEWS FLASH - our cars are NOT FAST anymore!!!!! just face it!! they are LUXURY CRUISERS designed to cruise at 70mph and stylin' - not to run the 1/4 mile. which would I take? the CL! I would ask someone to shoot me if i ever felt like getting a Forrester.

Tom2 ---- word to you mutha!

CLovis

Red Rider

Yeah, and Autoweek claims 0-60 in 8.5 !!!! A bit worse than 5.3 that C&D got.