[murcod]

bakerboy wrote:

Yeah, I drive a forester haha I wouldn't call that an SUV IMO, still a wagon with a decent ride height, turbo version is fun too

I just bought a Ford Kuga, so very much the same. It's my first auto- perhaps proof I'm getting old?

I discounted the Forester for a couple of reasons- 6 monthly services, no rear A/C outlets and the CVT (although Subaru's CVT's seem very good.)

If I bought a Vitara it would be as a second vehicle/ daily runabout. The turbo engine would just be to inject a bit of fun into the purchase. (We live in a hilly area and I hate under powered vehicles.)

[bakerboy]

murcod wrote:

bakerboy wrote:

Yeah, I drive a forester haha I wouldn't call that an SUV IMO, still a wagon with a decent ride height, turbo version is fun too

I just bought a Ford Kuga, so very much the same. It's my first auto- perhaps proof I'm getting old?

I discounted the Forester for a couple of reasons- 6 monthly services, no rear A/C outlets and the CVT (although Subaru's CVT's seem very good.)

If I bought a Vitara it would be as a second vehicle/ daily runabout. The turbo engine would just be to inject a bit of fun into the purchase. (We live in a hilly area and I hate under powered vehicles.)

I got the SH XT, before the CVT was a thing, mine doesn't have rear AC but later years did. Service interval isn't a concern IMO, it's still way cheaper than having to replace parts on the paj all the time haha

[jchomley]

Suzuki don't have anything I want anymore

Cheers,

Jack.

[murcod]

bakerboy wrote:

murcod wrote:

bakerboy wrote:

Yeah, I drive a forester haha I wouldn't call that an SUV IMO, still a wagon with a decent ride height, turbo version is fun too

I just bought a Ford Kuga, so very much the same. It's my first auto- perhaps proof I'm getting old?

I discounted the Forester for a couple of reasons- 6 monthly services, no rear A/C outlets and the CVT (although Subaru's CVT's seem very good.)

If I bought a Vitara it would be as a second vehicle/ daily runabout. The turbo engine would just be to inject a bit of fun into the purchase. (We live in a hilly area and I hate under powered vehicles.)

I got the SH XT, before the CVT was a thing, mine doesn't have rear AC but later years did. Service interval isn't a concern IMO, it's still way cheaper than having to replace parts on the paj all the time haha

No according to this review they still don't have rear vents http://www.motoring.com.au/subaru-fores ... ew-101442/

Quote:

The one shortcoming is its lack of adjustable vents to service passengers in the rear.

The Outback has them, but it's a very large vehicle.

[CairnsZook]

Has anyone driven the turbo version new Vit yet? I'm thinking about one for the wife too.

[murcod]

There are a few reviews around on Aussie sites eg. http://www.caradvice.com.au/435575/2016 ... bo-review/ , http://www.carsguide.com.au/car-reviews ... rive-40823 , http://www.whichcar.com.au/car-reviews/ ... ara-review

[murcod]

BTW going by the published performance figures the turbo only appears to bring the performance up to average levels for that type of vehicle eg. they're quoting 0-100km/h in 9.5 seconds. (A Mazda CX-3 with it's 2.0l engine is supposed to do it in under 9 seconds. http://www.carsguide.com.au/car-reviews ... test-39050 )

Hopefully in gear acceleration would be decent and should surpass a comparable N/A engine?