If you need context, as my colleague Steven Ewing pointed out in his Wilderness first drive , that matches the clearance offered by the Mercedes-Benz G-Class. Few would question that thing's stance. Mind you, performance after the asphalt ends has as much to do with drivetrain, and the Wilderness makes do with largely the same setup as the regular Outback.
That is, open front and rear differentials driven from a continuously variable transmission and a clutch-type center differential. However, a shift to a 4. Sadly, it also means fuel economy reduction: 22 mpg city, 26 mpg highway and 24 mpg combined compared to 23, 30 and 26, respectively.
In my testing those figures proved accurate, with a Subaru Outback. Continue Reading. Model Year Editors' Rating. Front Head Room inches Front Leg Room inches Front Shoulder Room inches Front Hip Room inches Second Row Head Room inches Second Row Leg Room inches Second Row Shoulder Room inches Second Row Hip Room inches Cargo Area Dimensions.
Cargo Bed Width Between Wheelhousings inches Cargo Bed Height inches Steering Type Rack-Pinion. Steering Ratio :1 NA. Turns, lock to lock NA. Front Suspension Type Strut. Rear Suspension Type Double Wishbone. Brake Type 4-Wheel Disc. Anti-Lock-Braking System 4-Wheel. Front Brake Rotors, diameter x thickness inches Rear Brake Rotors, diameter x thickness inches Rear Drums, diameter x width inches NA.
Wheels and Tires. Front Wheel Size inches 17 X 7. Front Wheel Material Aluminum. Rear Wheel Size inches 17 X 7. Rear Wheel Material Aluminum. It returns 26 mpg in the city, 33 mpg on the highway and 29 combined. The Outback comes standard with the same 2. However, in the slightly larger and heavier Outback, this powertrain feels more sluggish — especially after you try the other available Outback powertrain.
The XT versions of the Outback use a turbocharged flat-four displacing 2. The tradeoff is a fuel economy sacrifice of 3 mpg, which is not a lot, considering what you get in return. The Forester is rated to tow up to 1, pounds. The Outback with the same engine can tow up to 2, pounds. Equipped with the 2. This is the most obvious and probably the most important difference between the two vehicles, on par with price. The Outback is the bigger vehicle of the two, but interestingly enough, they have similar amounts of cargo space on paper, with the Forester at Max cargo area is a similar story, with the Forester seeing a 0.
However, the spec sheet doesn't tell the whole story. Some rough measurements in my driveway were illuminating. Both are the same width between the wheel wells, at about 43 inches.
However, the Outback's cargo floor is 7. It's also compromised by the shape of its tailgate, which tapers inward at the glass. The Forester is more of a box, with its full cargo height extending nearly all the way to the rear.
This means that the Forester is better at carrying tall, boxy objects. However, longer flatter items will fit better in the Outback, and for typical usage — groceries, sporting equipment, a road trip's worth of gear — the Outback wins for its larger cargo footprint behind the rear seats. The Outback is longer than the Forester by a whole 9. As such, the Outback definitely feels like the bigger car going down the road. The Outback is by far the better choice here. All but the base trim have the new, gigantic tablet-style display almost 12 inches that puts all its various infotainment functions at your fingertips.
The Forester, on the other hand, is a bit more complicated. It has a smaller, 8-inch touchscreen, which is less extravagant to behold but may actually be easier to use in some ways. The bigger concern is the multifunction display above it. Operated with steering wheel buttons, it's clunky to operate, and it can hard to remember which interface controls which vehicle function. The answer often seems arbitrary. After testing it, we wouldn't go out of our way to make sure our Subaru came with DriverFocus, regardless of model, unless we were sharing the car with young drivers who might need every bit of extra monitoring.
Again, the Outback is the winner here. Fit and finish are simply better. Where materials can clash in terms of look and feel in the Forester, they play together better in the Outback. From a brand that has struggled to makes its interiors look and feel upscale, the Outback achieves a sense of quality, while the Forester can still feel planted in the economy realm. It has actually served us quite well on many multiple-hundred-mile trips with nary a complaint from our rear end.
0コメント