2004 Subaru Forester XT runs 13.8 STOCK!!!
 

Clicky C/D TEST RESULTS
:hitit:
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

:damn:

0.3 seconds slower in the quarter mile than a Porche Cayenne Turbo LOL

0.3 seconds slower in the quarter mile than a Porche Cayenne Turbo LOL Thats sweet. And you save about $70,000

hmm how did that happen? :(

If properly launched that thing will fly in the 1/4 due to the AWD and short gearing.

sweet car

That is one badass SUV :damn:

Hell yeah, it's finally here, Turbo Forester has been in Japan for years. 2.5 block baby with variable intake timing, kicks some WRX butt.

Maybe my wife should get that instead of a civic

Thats sweet!!

WOW that is sweet
:hitit:
:damn:

Cant really compare the 2... I personally would rather have the Forster than the Civic (but I already have the Civic so...............)

>:| ... could you imagine ... an s2000 getting beaten by an suv ... ?

T_T;;;;

If I owned a WRX, I'd be pissed off that the same company that made my WRX made their SUV faster.

I have a feeling this is going to come around on subaru in some way.

its funny...in Motor Trend..they timed the Forester 2.5 XT 0-60 8.5 sec. it has only 210 HP...210 HP isn't bad...but i'll never run 13.8 1/4 stock...

I am wondering if we are going to find out this is a misprint, and the times were incorrect. That wouldn't shock me, considering you can never trust anything car and driver says. They are morons.

I would be willing to bet my left testicle that this time will prove to be incorrect. I would expect the XT to run maybe low to mid 7s 0-60, and low to mid 15s in the 1320, which still isn't bad for this class of SUV, but it's no 13.8 machine. I think C/D printed the wrong times for this vehicle, and those times belong to something else. No way the XT could hit these #s bone stock, maybe with a turbo upgrade, but not stock. Althought I'll eat my hat if these #s can be repeated elsewhere.

Lets get some more #s on the table.

Actually, it will do 13.8s... it's using a slightly detuned version of the STi motor. I know it's rated at 215HP only, but it's an understated horsepower rating (a la SRT4). They made it 215HP, so it wouldn't eclipse their own WRX (and the WRX wagons).

One of the testers even commented on how it is quicker than the WRX on the counterpoint column.

"Oh, and it's significantly quicker than the WRX."

"It's torquey and exhibits no noticeable turbo lag. As good as it is, the WRX, with smaller motor and lack of variable valve timing, never lets you forget where the power comes from."

Based on that, it should show some taillights to cars like BMW 540i, Lexus GS430 and Mustang GT Mach 1s.

Did you read the article? It's a different engine than the WRX STi. And a 13.8 DOES eclipse their own WRX and the WRX wagons.

Actually, the two engines are very similar. I doubt Subaru would go out of their way to totally make a brand new engine for a Forester. I'm sure there some internal differences, but despite the "custom made" claims, the BIG difference here is 11.6psi versus 14.6psi on the WRX STi.

Another quote from the counterpoint:

"It uses basically the same engine as the hyper-performance WRX STi, but with less turbo boost."

1/4mile time of 13.8s indeed does eclipse the WRX. But 1/4mile times don't sell cars, horsepower numbers do. At least to the general public. Hence the reduced horsepower claims. 3psi reduction shouldn't reduce the horsepower by 85HP.....

Besides, they aren't even advertising the Forester 2.5XT as a major high performance car. WRX and WRX STi are Subaru's high performance image cars.

No funky gold rims, no over sized wings, or anything of that nature here. Just a subtle sleeper that should appeal to people who might buy a Volvo or a Saab. And maybe steal some from BMW 3-series sport wagons, and Audi A4 Avants.

Exactly. 3psi isn't going to drop the engine 85hp. There's a LOT more different than "just" the boost level from the STi engine. The internals are different. Different head. The forester has always had its own 2.5 liter platform engine.

And as I said before, I trust car and driver absolutely zero.

Ummm it won't be beating any Mach 1s my friend. Don't know enough about the bmw or lexus, but it won't touch the Mach 1

Naww... trust me. It is UNDER-RATED. Do you know why? Because they don't want to SHAME the WRX.

It's just like Chrysler's idea to under-rated the SRT4. Sure, people in the know-hows like us know how quick it is by test times. But we all know SRT4 actually makes 235HP on the dyno. Which means official SAE horsepower ratings should have been around 270-280HP. But those numbers would pretty much eclipse EVERY VEHICLE in their line up, except the Viper SRT10.

How in the world are they going to sell cars like the new Crossfire (rated 215HP), and 300M (rated 255HP)? Neon with "215HP" is safe.

Back to Subaru. If Forester 2.5XT pumps around 270HP at flywheel (which I believe it does), 227HP WRX suddenly sounds weak. Nobody would buy the WRX, especially the wagon version. Yet they charge a premium for it, and the profits are great. Well, they can't jeapordize that!

Of course, more tests will have to be done to be 100% sure, but road tests by MotorTrend and Road & Track will be no different. Trust me.

Both tested by C&D:

Mach1
0-30mph: 2.1s
0-40mph: 3.0s
0-60mph: 5.3s
0-70mph: 7.0s
1/4mile: 13.8s

2.5XT:
0-30mph: 1.3s
0-40mph: 2.6s
0-60mph: 5.3s
0-70mph: 6.9s
1/4mile: 13.8s

Advange of 2.5XT = AWD. Near perfect launches, every time, regardless of raod conditions.

No doubt in my mind that the Mach 1, BMW 540i and the Lexus GS430 would win highway pulls, but off the line, sorry, all three of them gets owned.

Yep, I agree with 01coupe. Personally, I am shocked with the performance numbers of that car. Any granny out there now, can technically smoke me in my 04 rex in her new SUV and not even know it.

Uh, you failed to read the other posts. Motor Trend tested the car at 0-60 in 8.5. WAY higher (and sounds more logical) than what car and drivel tested.

Again, car and drivel is the devil. You can't trust ANYTHING those f*ckers ever say.

u sure i can trust ya?....

5.3 sec and 8.5 is a big diffrence.. :_doh:

make sure u read other post before u say somthing...^^;;

just a suggestion...

you post the times then say it gets owned off the line? it gets owned 0-40, then is even by 60 pulls ahead at 70 and they finish flat even in the 1/4. Thats not too much ownage.

LOL.. lots of responses.

Okay, let's go over a few things. Regular 2.5L Forester already does around 9.5s-9.8s to 0-60mph.... most cars (even Corollas), by adding variable valve timing, takes off 1/4 to 1/2 second off. So that brings it to low 9's. Add 11.3psi of boost to it?? Sorry, you get a LOT faster than 8.5s.

I don't know how creditble this site is, but car-videos.com has the Forester 2.5XT at 0-60mph at 5.2s and 1/4mile at 13.94s.

Link: http://www.car-videos.com/performanc...?id1=277&id2=0

But for all you NON-BELIEVERS.... UK-Spec Forester S-Turbo with ONLY 174HP & 181Torque hits 60mph in a brisk 7.7s (tested by Evo mag, in UK). And that is with only the 2.0L motor. It doesn't even have variable valve timing.

Yet you still stand by the fact that this bigger motor, 215HP car (with 235ft of torque to boot), does only 8.5s?? I don't think so. 227HP WRX Wagon, with less torque does what, 14's? You'll bite your tonge when more test data comes up. And when a Forester 2.5XT finds its way to your local drag strip.

To Validus: Ownage is ownage, despite how little the difference. I stated CLEARLY in my original post that the Forester 2.5XT would show its taillights to 540i, GS430 & Mach1, and it does. You know that in real life, AWD cars are way easier to launch than a nose heavy RWD car like the Stang.