Anyone towing with a Subaru Forester competitor?

[Borden]

Originally Posted by Bobbie Mayer

Yup. One reason you see lowered Boler's in Canada is the 7 foot charge.
That has apparently been dropped on some routes.

We can not get that low as trailer is 8'1" plus ridge height and Max air vents on top of that plus well over 20' with TV 'will look into that per foot charge'.

Just for fun http://www.fiberglassrv.com/forums/f...ers-45110.html we have Bear 8 Leo 11 and Keisha 16

[Bobbie Mayer]

I imagine only the 13s ever got that low, and I've seen them advertised as lowered for the ferry. My Campster barely makes it into a standard 7 foot garage but I think would fit the ferry requirement (it goes into the garage up a short drive so is angled up which makes it a tighter squeeze) but it sits a lot higher off the ground than a small Boler does.

[floyd]

Originally Posted by Bobbie Mayer

Like Rav-4, other types in the same class? I just want to see what else is out there that can still tow.

I'm also interested in knowing if anyone is using a Forester near its 2500 lb max?

Ford Escape, is a very stable platform, in this class.

[Bobbie Mayer]

I looked at the Escape, but if I went that route it would be to get the hybrid, and that isn't available in AWD (though IS rated for 3500 with towing package.)

[Ed Harris]

Originally Posted by Bobbie Mayer

Yeah, me, too, but I don't think it will happen.


I think I'll like it when I get used to it but I love the old design so I don't know why they had to change. Maybe I should look at the outback. I picked Forester initially for the headroom and legroom.

I thought about the Forester a while back found an amazing low mileage,old lady driven deal from one of my car dealer clients.
I took it for a weekend to see if it would work for me and it had so little leg room for me I had to turn it down.
The new one is a whole different beast and is a lot more comfy for me so I guess it depends on the driver to determine just how practical a vehicle is.

Nothing mean intended if you feel like an old lady of course!

[Bobbie Mayer]

Headroom was more important than legroom in the old Forester. The new one has much more legroom- I had to scootch the seat up to reach the pedals; in the old one I have it all the way back. My dad drove one but he was tall like me-longer body, not longer legs. Mom drives it now with the seat forward a notch.

I'm getting more used to the looks of the new one and will probably go for it. Now to decide whether to buy in California or change residencies and buy in Washington. I was all set to do the latter but taxes and registration are about equal and it will cost more to register the trailer in Washington so now I'm not sure. (I have to change in a few years, the question is when, as I'm half time in each for awhile.)

Oddly the dealership here had a 5-speed in stock. When I bought my first Forester they not only didn't have one, they weren't very interested in getting one for me, so I bought mine in Porterville instead. But no Subaru dealer there anymore.

[Wallo]

I drive an '09 2.5x Forester towing a 13' Scamp/full bath, water, and travel gear. Have no idea what it weighs, but it pulls the trailer very well. Gas mileage is about 19 MPG travelling between 58-63mph. Have to downshift out of o/d when going up long hills. Have towed in 115 degree weather on interstates with no problems. Got the Forester because of it's higher tow rating. Had 2003 Honda CRV before. Liked it, but was afraid it wouldn't tow the little Scamp.

[Bobbie Mayer]

That's good to know; I know it can tow what I have now but I might decide to upgrade some day.

[Radar1]

The Outback could be considered a Forester competitor and has a 2700 lb tow rating with brakes. Here's a post I made on the Casita forum;

"Just completed a 450 mile roundtrip with our 2008 Outback. I can't speak for the CVT transmission in the newer Outbacks, but our 4 cyl with the "old fashioned" automatic did a commendable job of hauling our Scamp 16 from GA to AL and back. Our total loaded weight was 2595 lbs; 235 on the tongue and 2360 on the axle. This included a full fresh water tank to help reduce the tongue weight, although I plan to move the battery from the tongue to the rear "Casita style" so I don't have to carry as much fresh water in the future. We kept our speed at 60 MPH or below, and the Subaru took the rolling hills we encountered in stride. The only time we had to drop below 60 was right after a bulgemobile pulled by a Ford Diesel passed us but he lost speed up the hill and dropped back to 55. Seemed ironic that I was pulling with my flat four engine with no problems and the big diesel was belching black smoke trying to keep up speed. I didn't bother trying to pass him on the uphill since I knew he'd regain his speed on the downhill and just pass me again.
My Subaru is outfitted with an extra transmission cooler and a Prodigy brake controller. I had a wide kayak strapped to the crossbars, and although the fuel mileage dropped to 18.5 compared to my normal 28, the Subaru was able to travel 27% further on a gallon of gas than my normal TV, which is a Dodge Dakota Quad Cab, 2WD, with a 4.7 V8. The Dakota normally gets about 14.5 towing.
I doubt if I'll use the Subaru if any steep hills are involved, as I suspect the mileage would suffer a bit more on big hills than it did on the rolling hills. It is a nice feeling to know that it's a very capable backup vehicle in case I ever get rid of the truck and I would be comfortable making it my prime towing vehicle if I had to. I was truly amazed at how well the combination worked."

John

[honda03842]

WE tow with a smaller vehicle like yours (Honda CRV) and don't find big hills dramatically, head winds are more dramatic. I bet the kayak has a big effect on your mileage.

When we drove a motorhome we found hills were never a factor in mileage because the lower uphill speeds seemed to be balanced by less mileage loss to drag losses, continuous head winds are the real mileage killers or high speeds.

AS to moving the battery, we're using a Casita this winter and I hate the battery under the rear dinette. It makes service unpleasant. I much prefer it on the front where it's easier to check water level.

This winter I've learned weight is secondary to shape and frontal area. Our Casita weighs about 500 #s more than our last trailer of similar size but get's 3 mpg more when towing.

If it were my Casita I'd get rid of one of the metal propane tanks and go to one fiberglass tank to reduce front weight.

Safe travels

[Bobbie Mayer]

I'll agree on the headwinds, I drove Fresno to Sacramento once in headwinds and it took an extra 45 minutes, plus was an absolutely miserable drive, and I got about 15 mpg. Hills are not a big issue, but I drive a manual so I just downshift. I wonder if the taller Forester will make a big difference with wind as it will be closer to the height of the trailer- right now the trailer rides higher than the TV and a Campster is not particularly aerodynamic.

[Carol H]

Originally Posted by Borden

Electric bakes make a big difference as does the Load Equalizing Hitch. Even though 8% tongue works well with a car the boler requires WD to meet and exceed our needs. (Subaru is like a car)

Keep in mind that Subaru's manual states equalizing hitches are not to be used.

[Radar1]

Originally Posted by honda03842

WE tow with a smaller vehicle like yours (Honda CRV) and don't find big hills dramatically, head winds are more dramatic. I bet the kayak has a big effect on your mileage.

AS to moving the battery, we're using a Casita this winter and I hate the battery under the rear dinette. It makes service unpleasant. I much prefer it on the front where it's easier to check water level.

If it were my Casita I'd get rid of one of the metal propane tanks and go to one fiberglass tank to reduce front weight.

Safe travels

The kayak may not have hurt the mileage much if at all. It probably acts like an air diverter and somewhat splits the air before it hits the front of the Scamp. It's funny, but if I just have my cross bars on, the fuel mileage and wind noise is worse than if I have the kayak attached to them.

When I move the battery I'll use an access door and a slide out carrier to make access easier. Moving the battery to a spot behind the left tire will also help to balance the side to side weight, which right now is a bit heavy on the door side, where the awning, water heater, stove, microwave, sink, and fresh water reside.

I did reduce to one tank on my Scamp to help lower the tongue weight (it had the dual tank option). The reduced tongue weight seems to have smoothed out the ride too. Too heavy a tongue weight can put one heck of a load on the rear of the tow vehicle over bumps like those at bridge connectors. Mine was over 300 lbs before adjustments.

John

[Herb Sutton]

Most manufacturers give an automatic a higher tow rating than the same vehicle with a stick shift. The clutch is the weak link.

[honda03842]

Originally Posted by Herb Sutton

Most manufacturers give an automatic a higher tow rating than the same vehicle with a stick shift. The clutch is the weak link.

Our tow vehicle has a clutch. We prefer manual to automaticss because they're less expensive, easy to repair and nicer to tow behind a motorhome.

I agree that the clutch can be a weak point, particularly when backing up hills and around obstructions, where this is a tendency to slip the clutch and heat the clutch surface. Our clutch has 140,000 miles on it and still seems fine. In normal driving it does not seem to be a problem.

Norm

[Bobbie Mayer]

I believe the Forester is rated the same for towing in manual and automatic.

[floyd]

Originally Posted by Herb Sutton

Most manufacturers give an automatic a higher tow rating than the same vehicle with a stick shift. The clutch is the weak link.

Actually it is a lack of confidence in the ability of the driver which spawns the rating discrepancy, not some mechanical insufficiency

[Steve L.]

It's the clutch. More slippage and quicker wear than an auto.

[Radar1]

I remember the days that if you wanted a high tow rating you HAD to buy a stick shift with a granny gear. Automatics seemed to get higher ratings as the manual transmissions started getting lower ratings.
Subaru has the same tow ratings for manual and automatic, but they actually place more restrictions on the automatic when towing up hills above certain temps above 100 degrees.

Check out the article about the plans to make the Subaru Outback 50% larger due to customer demand;
http://www.thedetroitbureau.com/2011...grand-outback/

John

[Carol H]

Originally Posted by Radar1

I
Check out the article about the plans to make the Subaru Outback 50% larger due to customer demand;
http://www.thedetroitbureau.com/2011...grand-outback/

John

Thankfull that Subaru would never do that. :-)

Note at the end of the article reads:
"We at Subaru of America hope you have a happy April 1.
The maker did include this footnote:
Not really. It’s an April Fool’s joke. We did build one of these cars, but couldn’t get it out of the door. The Legal guys make us add this."