Jump to content
  • Announcements

    • Brad Eden

      TO THOSE REGISTERING FOR MEMBERSHIP ON UJ   01/06/2018

      To the Guests who have decided to register for Membership. PLEASE read Terms of Service, not just checking it off. This is covered there: Add more info than just "hunting" or "Upland hunting" or "birds" or "outdoors" or similar nebulous terms in the required INTERESTS field. Despite this Boards strong spam filtering function, some Spam registrations do sneak through. I need an inkling that you are a human being not a Spam Bot tagging onto key words. Also please do not use a business name as your User Name. Thank you.
Brad Eden

Subaru Crosstrek or Forester...

Recommended Posts

martyg

Brad - 'eff new. Waste of money. If I were you I'd look at a CPO vehicle. Subaru's for me (except the STI and WRX) are largely transportation appliances. To answer your question though - Crosstrek and Forrester share the same platform, different body. More usable space in the Forrester.

 

That category is super competitive. If it were me I'd be looking for CPO's with a great warrantee program from Subaru, Toyota, Mazda, etc. I also would be hung up on AWD. If driving in snow is an issue, and you will have the vehicle for a while get a FWD w  a great traction control system and snow tires. It will save weight, gas mileage, up front expense and be far more capable in the snow than an AWD car. Swapping out wheels results in greater life span for all.

 

We used to live at the base of the snowiest mountain in the world. I drove a FWD car with snows up it five days of the week. Now we live in CO. My commute is similar, but with less snow and more ice. I drive a FWD car with studded snows. I have the option of driving my wife's Subaru with all-season radials or my 4Runner with AT tires, but my GTI (purchased as a CPO with 11,000 miles on it) is far more capable in snow.

 

Good luck.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
snapt

4x4/AWD with snows > FWD with snows.

 

I looked the Honda HRV the other day for a commuter rig. The price seems very competitive in AWD, found one with 10k miles for 15K, and it seems comparable in size to the Crosstrek.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Flush

Martyg, 

   The fwd is more capable than awd routine cracks me up.

You are certainly entintled to your opinion, but you are about the only one that has it.

 

Fwd is certainly plenty capable and no question most people could do fine with a good fwd vehicle with good tires, but when you compare apples to apples in terms of type of vehicle and tires.... 4 driven wheels will always provide more traction and therefore capability. 

 

Comparing an awd with all season tires to fwd with studded snows is ridiculous.

 

That's cool you like fwd with good tires and find it plenty capable, that doesn't make it more capable than than awd.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
garyRI

My 2001 Forester needed a headgasket at 140K about 4 years ago. Headgasket, waterpump and timing belt cost $1200. I got rid of it running at 200K. Bought a 2010 Outback a year ago and had the dealer replace the headgasket as part of the deal. headgaskett waterpump timing belt was less than $1000. 

 

Cars need maintenance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
martyg
1 hour ago, Flush said:

Martyg, 

   The fwd is more capable than awd routine cracks me up.

You are certainly entintled to your opinion, but you are about the only one that has it.

 

Fwd is certainly plenty capable and no question most people could do fine with a good fwd vehicle with good tires, but when you compare apples to apples in terms of type of vehicle and tires.... 4 driven wheels will always provide more traction and therefore capability. 

 

Comparing an awd with all season tires to fwd with studded snows is ridiculous.

 

That's cool you like fwd with good tires and find it plenty capable, that doesn't make it more capable than than awd.

 

 

 

Its not really my opinion. A follow ski instructor is an engineer and product developer for the VW group. This guy has German vehicles like I have bicycles - Audis, Porches, VWs, Mercedes, BMWs... His everyday driver up to the hill is / was a TDI wagon with regular snows (provided better control than his Audis and BMW 5 Series AWD wagon with all-seasons radials).  Since this guy has access to test equipment and test tracks that we can only dream of I tended to put faith in his opinion and purchased a TDI wagon myself. Traction, IME, is not the issue. I used to get a new Subaru every year as part of my job and have owned several Audis so I have some basis of experience with them. The key to staying on the road in winter where we have lived is breaking ability and control when descending.

 

And yes, I will put my GTI with studded snows up against any AWD car with all-season radials any day. On powder days our highway up to the hill is littered with those AWD SUVs - mostly with Texas plates. Certainly an Audi with studded snows all around would be a killer winter car. However if you need that combo to be comfortable maybe you should stay off of mtn roads.

 

Our running average for snow at Mt Baker is 735" per year. I teach skiing 5 - 7 days a week all season long. How about where you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
snapt

I know that GTI doesn't have the clearance to be a viable single winter vehicle, My sister in law has one with snows on it and it can't make it up my road mid storm when the plow hasn't come by since 4am.

 

A .410 isn't the most ideal pheasant gun, but choked right with the right shells and right person pulling the trigger it will work fine, just like a GTI with good tires, the right roads, and someone who knows how to drive will be fine on most winter roads.

 

Also our snow quality blows away Bakers, just sayin!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
River19
2 hours ago, martyg said:

 

Its not really my opinion. A follow ski instructor is an engineer and product developer for the VW group. This guy has German vehicles like I have bicycles - Audis, Porches, VWs, Mercedes, BMWs... His everyday driver up to the hill is / was a TDI wagon with regular snows (provided better control than his Audis and BMW 5 Series AWD wagon with all-seasons radials).  Since this guy has access to test equipment and test tracks that we can only dream of I tended to put faith in his opinion and purchased a TDI wagon myself. Traction, IME, is not the issue. I used to get a new Subaru every year as part of my job and have owned several Audis so I have some basis of experience with them. The key to staying on the road in winter where we have lived is breaking ability and control when descending.

 

And yes, I will put my GTI with studded snows up against any AWD car with all-season radials any day. On powder days our highway up to the hill is littered with those AWD SUVs - mostly with Texas plates. Certainly an Audi with studded snows all around would be a killer winter car. However if you need that combo to be comfortable maybe you should stay off of mtn roads.

 

Our running average for snow at Mt Baker is 735" per year. I teach skiing 5 - 7 days a week all season long. How about where you?

 

In my experience, tires are 90% of winter performance when it comes to equipment.  To potentially settle this mini pissing match, tire for tire (I run studded snows on our designated weekly mountain vehicles) I'll take my AWD with studded snows and clearance over any FWD car........  The VW FWD with studded tires is a very capable platform, but let's not get carried away thinking throwing studs on an AWD isn't a more capable vehicle, maybe marginally, but more capable nonetheless.  Can we all at least agree on that? :-)

 

Marty, correct me if I'm wrong but your original point was $ for $ a solid FWD vehicle with studs is another economical option just coming at it from a different angle......save on up front costs, potentially better fuel economy, less shit to break and maintain etc....... All that I can agree with and makes sense.

 

For argument's sake, I would also take a FWD with studded snows over most AWD SUVs with "all season" tires.......and my decision would be based 100% on how shitty most "all season" tires perform in winter conditions especially once they get some miles on them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tim Frazier
5 hours ago, martyg said:

Brad - 'eff new. Waste of money. If I were you I'd look at a CPO vehicle. Subaru's for me (except the STI and WRX) are largely transportation appliances. To answer your question though - Crosstrek and Forrester share the same platform, different body. More usable space in the Forrester.

 

That category is super competitive. If it were me I'd be looking for CPO's with a great warrantee program from Subaru, Toyota, Mazda, etc. I also would be hung up on AWD. If driving in snow is an issue, and you will have the vehicle for a while get a FWD w  a great traction control system and snow tires. It will save weight, gas mileage, up front expense and be far more capable in the snow than an AWD car. Swapping out wheels results in greater life span for all.

 

We used to live at the base of the snowiest mountain in the world. I drove a FWD car with snows up it five days of the week. Now we live in CO. My commute is similar, but with less snow and more ice. I drive a FWD car with studded snows. I have the option of driving my wife's Subaru with all-season radials or my 4Runner with AT tires, but my GTI (purchased as a CPO with 11,000 miles on it) is far more capable in snow.

 

Good luck.

 

 

I agree 100%.  If your talking OFF road that's a different subject but for commuting on the road I would take a FWD with good snow tires any day over AWD with all season tires, not even close.  Remember, AWD does nothing for stopping.  During several storms when I had the option of several vehicles my Vibe with General Altimax Artics was always my choice. (I did go up to a 215/60 16 size same as a Forester for ground clearance)  Traction seems to get better the faster you go and you really have to be careful.

 

 

image (3).jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Flush

I think River19 said it well....

 

Martyg, I don't live where we get that much snow, but I drive in it occasionally. 

 Funny coincidence about your friend... as I'm also a mechanical engineer. I'm out of the automotive industry now, but that is where I started. I too have been on test tracks (In Michigan in my case), and have some racing experience as well.  I also have a good friend and colleague, he  was an in-house test-driver for one of the big Japanese manufacturers now owns his own sub-contracting business that performs test-driving duties for many of the auto companies, including cold/winter driving at facilities in the upper mid-west. Oh yeah, he also used to be a factory sponsored rally driver.    

 

I'll mention to him and all my other former colleagues we were wrong about fwd vs awd.

 

And to say it again FWD with SNOW tires WILL often be better than AWD with All-season tires, but AWD with SNOW tires will be superior to FWD with SNOW tires.

 

In summary, I think River19 said it well.

 

I'm done with this little pissing match, unless someone can provide some physics of how removing the ability of the rear wheels to provide power improves limited-traction vehicle performance. Anecdotal evidence of tiny sample sizes isn't very interesting, at least to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
terrym

AWD or 4wd still need snows all around. Snows are a game changer for cornering and braking. Of course a 4wd with proper tires will outperform a FWD, no brainer. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
martyg
1 hour ago, River19 said:

 

In my experience, tires are 90% of winter performance when it comes to equipment.  To potentially settle this mini pissing match, tire for tire (I run studded snows on our designated weekly mountain vehicles) I'll take my AWD with studded snows and clearance over any FWD car........  The VW FWD with studded tires is a very capable platform, but let's not get carried away thinking throwing studs on an AWD isn't a more capable vehicle, maybe marginally, but more capable nonetheless.  Can we all at least agree on that? :-)

 

Marty, correct me if I'm wrong but your original point was $ for $ a solid FWD vehicle with studs is another economical option just coming at it from a different angle......save on up front costs, potentially better fuel economy, less shit to break and maintain etc....... All that I can agree with and makes sense.

 

For argument's sake, I would also take a FWD with studded snows over most AWD SUVs with "all season" tires.......and my decision would be based 100% on how shitty most "all season" tires perform in winter conditions especially once they get some miles on them.

 

That's exactly what I am saying. Yes, AWD with torque vectoring and studded snows all around would be the bomb. But really.... Do you need it? Would I rather spend $50K on a CPO Audi or $22.5K on a GTI and go heli and cat skiing for three weeks? Easy decision in my mind. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
terrym
6 hours ago, martyg said:

Brad - 'eff new. Waste of money. If I were you I'd look at a CPO vehicle. Subaru's for me (except the STI and WRX) are largely transportation appliances. To answer your question though - Crosstrek and Forrester share the same platform, different body. More usable space in the Forrester.

 

That category is super competitive. If it were me I'd be looking for CPO's with a great warrantee program from Subaru, Toyota, Mazda, etc. I also would be hung up on AWD. If driving in snow is an issue, and you will have the vehicle for a while get a FWD w  a great traction control system and snow tires. It will save weight, gas mileage, up front expense and be far more capable in the snow than an AWD car. Swapping out wheels results in greater life span for all.

 

We used to live at the base of the snowiest mountain in the world. I drove a FWD car with snows up it five days of the week. Now we live in CO. My commute is similar, but with less snow and more ice. I drive a FWD car with studded snows. I have the option of driving my wife's Subaru with all-season radials or my 4Runner with AT tires, but my GTI (purchased as a CPO with 11,000 miles on it) is far more capable in snow.

 

Good luck.

 

If you live in a place that gets that much snow why don't you put true snow tires on all your vehicles?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
snapt
1 hour ago, Tim Frazier said:

General Altimax Artics

+1, great bang for the buck. 

 

Marty, PSIA level 3?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jeff88

Believe Terrym has this right, especially with today's rides.

Before I owned a 4wd vehicle I had an '87 Saab 900s.  With 4 Gislaved snows mounted, it was a great winter drive.  The Saab had a 65/35 front/rear weight ration and the engine sat more in front of the front axle.  The traction was tremendous and 4 shows really helped directional stability as well as stopping power.  There were some almost level two tracks I'd take that car on miles back into the covers with 6" snow - not a problem.  As good as it was, it was not as good as the car that replaced it, a '95 explorer 4wd with M+S tires and more ground clearance.  Today's awd rides are not 65/35, much closer to 55/45 to 50/50 weight ratios.  FWD engines are often mounted behind the front axle to distribute weight more evenly for handling.    Even though I believe awd sits between these two and that the tires make a great difference, if you want to make an argument that fwd = awd, the fwd would have to be more like that old Saab than today's set-up.  BTW, our fwd '89 Maxima with snows on all 4 wheels and probably a 55/45 ratio wasn't as good as the Saab but much better than with just all season tires.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NECarson

All season tires are okay enough for most stuff, but not good at anything in particular. 

 

Of course snows on a fwd car will do better. Than crappy tires on an AWD. 

2 hours ago, martyg said:

 

That's exactly what I am saying. Yes, AWD with torque vectoring and studded snows all around would be the bomb. But really.... Do you need it? Would I rather spend $50K on a CPO Audi or $22.5K on a GTI and go heli and cat skiing for three weeks? Easy decision in my mind. 

Because a CPO Audi for $50k is the only AWD car? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×