Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Subaru Outback vs. Forester

I've never owned a Subaru, but I've read good things about their reputation and durability. What are the main differences between an Outback and a Forester?

Does one have heavier-duty components, or are they basically the same?

The Forester is a bit higher and boxier, if I was going for one it would be the Forester. I think they are a bit less expensive also.

I don't know the current situation, but in 2002 the Outback was built on a larger frame, while the Forester was on the smaller (Imprezza?) frame. The Outback was just a taller version of their standard wagon, maybe a few heavier components. It was never considered a true off the road vehicle.

That may have all changed.

Paul

Forester is what my wife now drives

Components I know nothing about, but ride comfort and drivability of Outback is superior to Forester. Forester has more cargo space, and more boxy. My family has owned both. I prefer the Outback. I live in the NW 6 miles from the pavement and never had chains on one yet. Of course like anything they have their limits, I have had my Dodge 2500 stuck in the driveway with the Outback parked right behind it. Have used a dozer at times to clear driveway. I can say nothing bad about either.

That was my take on the two when I was shopping in 2002. I bought the Outback. As I recall, the cargo area was similar.
The Forester looks like it has "grown up" over the years, more like a FS SUV, but I haven't been in the market.

My Outback was a semi-lemon, but I did wreck it so that it needed major repairs. Even before that it had little problems. I might consider another, but I won't buy a new vehicle that doesn't have factory service nearby. The nearest Subaru dealer is 50 miles from here. Subaru is quite selective about dealerships, doesn't have them everywhere.

Paul

If you're going an older model, get the Forester (before it was an SUV). If you're getting a new model go for the outback.

The Outback is way roomier than the Forester, and offers more horizontal storage in back vs vertical storage for the Forester. The auto Outback has a continuously variable transmission (CVT) with paddle shifting, which might be available in the Forester next year. Mileage for the Outback is better also, likely because of the tranny (as in transmission, not trans-gendered lesbian who identifies as a man).
The Forester is due for a refresh, and I consider it a somewhat dated model.
I prefer the Outback, although I am not too impressed with the sheet metal, which is thin. This translates into the better mileage, perhaps.
Can't go wrong with either. This new style Outback has the kinks worked out, and the Forester is rock solid also.
Both are very able to tow a small trailer. My old Forester hauled deer hunting gear and dead deer for years, while towing a Bear Track alu trailer.

My wife has a 12 forester, she loves it, no problems with it.

Sit in both.

In 2008 I tried each. In the Outback, I could not get enough room to move my foot from gas to brake without hitting the steering wheel with my knee. The Forester had plenty of room to work the pedals.

Bruce

Around here the Outbacks have a 2012 Obama/Biden sticker and an angry fur trader behind the wheel. Most of the Foresters just have an old faded anti Bush sticker.

But being Vermont that may just be a geographical thing!

There are no gayer commercials on TV or radio than that for Subaru.

The Outback is the crossover for the Legacy, and the Forrester is the crossover for the Imprezza, The outback, while larger, gets better milage this year because of the superior cvt tranny, which the Forrester is scheduled for next year.

My girlfriend has a 98 Forester with 206K on it. It's an impressive car but I don't like the boxer engine. Changing the spark plugs is difficult, the camshaft seals failed several times, and it's more complicated than it needs to be.