1
2
3
So, you need to get your CBR900-powered Locost to the track. But your friend with a heavily modified Forester (basically an STi wearing a Forester for a hat) wants to come. There's only one obvious solution.
They report 20 mpg and lots of fun at the track.
this is relevant to my interests! 
We are flashin trannys... wait that came out wrong
Very cool.
Damnit... I hate, hate, hate Foresters and what they meant for Subaru as a company... but I'm starting to really want one when I keep seeing pics like that.
--There is no turd more polished than the Ford Mustang--
ReverendDexter wrote: Damnit... I hate, hate, hate Foresters and what they meant for Subaru as a company... but I'm starting to really want one when I keep seeing pics like that.
What did they mean for Subaru as a company?
Hey that's almost legal! (probably acutally is, as car plus trailer is in the 2000lb range I'm sure).
Funny though, from what I hear of foresters they got roughly the same MPG pulling a trailer as my friends get about 21 mpg normally..
I saw my dream tow rig at the auction last year. It was a "Pimp My Ride" truck from MTV. The hard tonneau lifted hydraulically and had entertainment centers built in for both sides of the truck, and a gas grille slid out on the tailgate. Great for a track day.
Can you drive and count to five? I can (sometimes)
m4ff3w wrote: What did they mean for Subaru as a company?
Foresters were Subaru going from "The Outback is way better than any SUV" to caving in and making CUVs, then the Tribecca, and now turning the Outback into a 1st-gen Forester (at least size and seating-position wise). Basically it signified when they stopped sticking to their guns, and started trying to broaden their market appeal.
I LOVE the early Outbacks. I think that for a family car, there's not much out there thats' better. The Forester didn't DO anything better than the Outback, it just had the SUV look and seating position.
It apparently worked for them, though, as they're one of what, two? manufacturers that kept their sales numbers up.
--There is no turd more polished than the Ford Mustang--
This one from special stage peaked my interest.
ReverendDexter wrote: I LOVE the early Outbacks. I think that for a family car, there's not much out there thats' better. The Forester didn't DO anything better than the Outback, it just had the SUV look and seating position.
I hear what you're saying, but disagree (at least until the latest version).
The Forester shared a lot more with an Impreza wagon than the Outback. I'd love an early Forester, but the Outback leaves me cold. Diff'rent Strokes, I suppose.
STI-modded Foresters are just about as cool as Dad's car can get in my eyes.
I tried drag racing, but kept blowing the apex for turn 2... Xbox Live gamertag— GRM Tom
I'd say that combo is well under 2000 lbs - the Locost is under 1000, and that trailer is very light. It's my old Seven trailer.
Mike's Forester is pretty comprehensively swapped. Seats, steering rack, exhaust - very STi. I just look at them as Imprezas in disguise.
Love the Special Stage picture - until the obvious happens, and you cannibalize the tow vehicle as spares for the rally car, and all of a sudden you have two dead cars and no way to get home...
Square left in 50 caution ocean!
ReverendDexter wrote: I LOVE the early Outbacks. I think that for a family car, there's not much out there thats' better. The Forester didn't DO anything better than the Outback, it just had the SUV look and seating position.
the outback was a lifted legacy. the forester provides a ton more interior height. i never got why someone would buy an outback when they could get a legacy. a forester, i get...it has capabilities that the legacy doesn't.
for example my dogs are each 33" tall at the shoulder. based on my measurements, a legacy would barely work, if at all. a forester would work beautifully.
m4ff3w wrote:ReverendDexter wrote: Damnit... I hate, hate, hate Foresters and what they meant for Subaru as a company... but I'm starting to really want one when I keep seeing pics like that.What did they mean for Subaru as a company?
that they would make more money.
44CS - '04 RX-8 - www.GreyhoundAngelsAdoption.com
Buzz Killington wrote: the forester provides a ton more interior height. i never got why someone would buy an outback when they could get a legacy.
Outback had more interior length (much more space behind the back seats than a Forester), and if you lived in snow country/deer/rockslide country, that extra ride height was crucial.
--There is no turd more polished than the Ford Mustang--
sachilles wrote: This one from special stage peaked my interest.
Having driven in that contraption for a total of ~16 hours, I can say it is definitely feasible. For you folks that claim trucks are needed to tow anything, this will make you shudder!
I did survive, so that is saying something. The biggest issue was making sure to not get into situations where the brakes had to be slammed on. Otherwise, it was just dandy.
Rallying; It's like skydiving, except you have to dodge trees on your way down!
I wasn't digging on the Forester originally either, but I have to say, it is what the Outback Sport failed to ever be: a useful station wagon. The sloped rear hatch robs so much cargo (and in our case, dog) space it's useless. The Forester is just a boxy Impreza. I tend to like boxy cars anyway
The Legacy didn't do it for us. It's just longer and heavier, doesn't really offer anything extra for folks who typically only have two humans and 3 dogs in the car. The Outback I dislike as I'm not digging on the two tone paint nor the fact they are not easily lowered to proper ride height, which one can do easily in a Forester. Which I did. Which makes it a pleasant driving car (and no longer a pretend SUV).
"Having fun is my revenge on mortality"--Dustin Hoffman
I think that's what it is - seeing them lowered makes them a boxy station wagon, which is awesome. Seeing them at stock ride height they're a CUV, which is the devil.
--There is no turd more polished than the Ford Mustang--
My wife was allowed to get a company car that had to have good ground clearance and was made in the US. Turns out the Outback (at least at the time we were looking) had better ground clearance than her Grand Cherokee, and when I told her about the turbo versions she got all excited. If it hadn't been for the "made in the USA" rule, I would have put her in a Forester XT. We never got around to putting her on the company plan, but an all-black Outback XT turbo would have been a pretty fun "work truck".
To me, the original Outback was a good extension of what a station wagon can be. From what I recall, it had slightly taller roofline. I'd prefer that the lower body panels and bumpers were unpainted plastic cladding which is what they pretend to be. The extra ride height isn't a bad thing for those of us that occasionally require it. But then again, I'm the sort of guy who uses a Subaru wagon offroad and who believes in suspension travel. I've never understood lowering a Subaru personally, although Mike seems pretty happy with his blue beastie.
Square left in 50 caution ocean!
The Forester Sports up there towing the Locost is awesome. I wish they made one capable of hauling my much heavier Trans Am, maybe one with the new 3.6L 6-cylinder with a turbo. I'd buy one in a second. 
I like the forester, I'd like to give one a try some day but all the well priced ones are high mileage automatics. I'll give it some more time. I do like how subaru engine and suspension parts appear to be like legos, much like honda parts.
Saw this on a blog this morning, trailer looks a bit too heavy though. At least it is alu-mini-um.
1968 Fairlane 500 / 1998 Camaro Z/28
I've got a trailer, lighter than the one you put up Keith, with a car that is a bit heavier than a Locost, but not much. I'm pulling it with a Toyota 4-Runner 3.0 V-6. A friend that tows a GT 911 in an enclosed trailer with a hugass truck just kinda shook his head and said "squirrely".
Do you have brakes on either of these trailers? If the Forrester guy just showed up, I'm guessing he isn't wired for electric brakes.
I don't mind getting 20 mpg while towing, but I do mind when the tail wags the dog and we all go off into the rhubarb.
Dan
BMW -- You don't need a hibachi to cook rice.
subarus are even more lego-like than hondas...honda electrial is generally easier, but subie mechanicals seem quite a bit more bingbangboom. there are several STI-ish foresters running in chicago. some of the most practical and badass cars i've ever seen. saw one almost get FTD at a autox here.
One of our region chiefs is running a borrowed F-Mod this year... he brings it to events on a modded 5x8 trailer pulled by his STX-prepped WRX. Makes me very jealous, since my TDI would tow the same set-up with ease.
the impreza wagon pulling the impreza rally car: His comments on special stage indicated he added a brake controller/braked axle recently. He said he also outback springs on the rear of the tow car, which he said can be a little firm around town sans trailer. It gave me wood as I happen to have a wrx wagon, a gc bodied race car. So If I can come up with a light aluminum trailer with brakes, I'm good to go. Though I'd imagine getting the tongue weight correct is more crucial than with other tow setups.
Iirc, my wife's impreza was built in oklahoma.
2002maniac wrote: Iirc, my wife's impreza was built in oklahoma.
They have a plant in Lafayette, IN that currently builds Legacys, Outbacks, and Tribecas. Not sure if they ever did Impreza production.
What’s your favorite British sports car?
Triumph
MG
Austin Healey
Aston Martin
Jensen / Jensen Healey
TVR
Morgan
Check back soon for the next poll. View all polls
Built for the true classic car enthusiast, each issue of
Classic Motorsports features profiles on popular as well as unknown classics, along with comparison tests, useful technical articles, buying guides, personality pieces and more. Learn more about us.
Try the next issue free or vist the site.
