I'll have a 2010 Forester for a week; any questions I should look to answer?

[bradyholt]

Originally Posted by goodman

Would it be comfy to take a long car ride in?

Acceptably so. The seats seem to do fine over a couple of hours, though I haven't been in them for any stretches longer than that. It's not the steadiest on a windy interstate, and you could find cars with nicer front seats, but it would certainly not struggle to go on an extended trip.

[bradyholt]

Full photo gallery and details on the Forester's interior:
http://www.examiner.com/x-1017-DC-Ca...terior-details


.

[bradyholt]

Issues with the navigation system:

http://www.examiner.com/x-1017-DC-Car-Exam...vigation-system

[KS227]

The Forester was our #2 pick when car shopping back in August (the Equinox won). We were considering a 2.5X Limited with the Cold Weather Package.

Likes:
~ Comfortable, car-like handling
~ Great visibility
~ Nice cargo space
~ The sunroof was obscenely big
~ 8 (or 10?)-way power driver's seat was standard on the 2.5X Limited
~ Cold weather package was available and inexpensive (I do like heated seats on a cold morning)
~ They had a beautiful color, Paprika Red Pearl. For that color, I would have broken my personal rule against white, black, or red cars!

Dislikes:
~ The auto felt sluggish in shifting between gears. I did not want a manual, and the transmission was slow/sluggish enough that I was nervous about merging onto the interstate during the test drive. It's only a 4-speed.
~ Mileage was not as good as the AWD Equinox.
~ I hear that carseat installation is a bear in any Subaru besides the Tribeca. Since this will be a family vehicle when we have kids, that was a consideration.
~ The sunroof only slid, no tilt - and I prefer tilt over having the sunroof fully open.


Had the Equinox not been available, or if we'd needed a car ASAP, we would have gotten the Forester with no major reservations - it's just that the Equinox was better for us in the ways that mattered more.

[bradyholt]

Full review:

In too many cases, descriptions of a car as “basic” or “honest” or “competent but unexciting” are employed as attempts to excuse a bad car for being uncompetitive. “Sure, Car X isn’t going to appeal to a driving enthusiast, but it’s just fine for someone who wants good basic transportation,” far too many car reviews will conclude.

Reviews like that, of cars that are inexcusably inferior to competitors that would serve the same sort of consumer far better, cheapen the phrase of “honest transportation” to a euphemism for “bad.”

The 2010 Subaru Forester compact SUV – which spent a week with the DC Car Examiner – is good, honest, basic, competent but unexciting transportation. And it outdoes its competition at providing the virtues that make it so...

Continued at link:
http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-1...ion-done-right