Forester vs Cruiser

[Frank Logullo]

...and it is built by Chrysler...same plastic--different names. And
no sense even discussing horrible resale/trade value of most Chrysler
products.

I was going to mention that too. While getting my accident straightened
out, I had a Neon rental. For a new car it was a POS.
Frank

 

[Joe R]

Wow, I had no idea the Forester XT was so fast. Although MotorWeek
shows it at 6.2 seconds (not sub-6), that's very impressive.

The best PT Cruiser time by a reliable source (MotorWeek) is 6.8
seconds with an automatic transmisison:
http://www.mpt.org/motorweek/reviews/rt2210a.shtml
Manual trannies running 6.2, more in line with the Forester XT.
With $1,000 in upgrades, the PT Cruiser will run in the high 15s, and
still cost less than the Forester. But mods are a whole other
discussion. Unless people are racing, either car is powerful enough
for daily driving.

The Forester XT has 210 HP, 235 lb ft of torque and weighs 3090 lb
The PT Cruiser has 210 HP, 245 lb ft of torque and weighs 3101 lb

1 year old Forrester XTs run about $21,500 which was more than I was
willing to pay. I got my 1 year old PT Cruiser for $17,000. Low
re-sale value of the Chrysler was a plus for me. AWD wasn't important
to me, but is really sweet in the Forester if needed.

 

[Daya]

Chrysler? The quality probably better than 10 years ago. They don't have
problem with the engine these days now. My friend has a Chrysler and has
several annoying problems such as leaking oil, broken gas line, ABS senser
on all the time etc.. Not major problems and won't take long to fix. But
the money and time spent caused him to think twice to get his next Chrysler
car.
I won't drive a car without AWD. I feel more secure. And Forester is one of
the safest cars out there. The high ground clearance is a plus also.

 

[SilverXT (was BlueSTi)]

Wow, I had no idea the Forester XT was so fast. Although MotorWeek
shows it at 6.2 seconds (not sub-6), that's very impressive.

The best PT Cruiser time by a reliable source (MotorWeek) is 6.8
seconds with an automatic transmisison:
http://www.mpt.org/motorweek/reviews/rt2210a.shtml
Manual trannies running 6.2, more in line with the Forester XT.
With $1,000 in upgrades, the PT Cruiser will run in the high 15s, and
still cost less than the Forester. But mods are a whole other
discussion. Unless people are racing, either car is powerful enough
for daily driving.

The Forester XT has 210 HP, 235 lb ft of torque and weighs 3090 lb
The PT Cruiser has 210 HP, 245 lb ft of torque and weighs 3101 lb

1 year old Forrester XTs run about $21,500 which was more than I was
willing to pay. I got my 1 year old PT Cruiser for $17,000. Low
re-sale value of the Chrysler was a plus for me. AWD wasn't important
to me, but is really sweet in the Forester if needed.

Yea, 0-60 and 1/4 mile times tend to vary as much as a second one way
or the other. It depends a lot on the driver. Either way the FXT or
the PT are no slouches. I am told that the FXT motors are highly
under rated for power. Most of the dyno numbers I have seen have put
them a good 20 HP over what Subaru specs them out at. That is why you
are seeing the 0-60 and 1/4 mile times that seem fast compared to the
rated output.
SilverFXT
"Hey you just got smoked by an SUV!"

 

[Joe R]

Daya,
What model/year does your friend have?

I suspect that quality issues vary from model to model, factory to
factory, and country of origin to country of origin. It would be a sad
state of affairs if only the Chryslers built in the USA had poor
quality ratings. The PT Cruiser is built in Mexico and is given very
high quality rating.

Joe