Which is best? Subaru Forester 2016 vs Subaru Forester 2004

We’ll test the updated Forester, and for making it more interesting we’ll compare it to the most legendary generation of this model. Watch it and enjoy!
🤟 Subscribe kzbin.info_cent...
👉 / twohorsepower

[@iCazZiStronZi]

Subaru can only compete with themselves lol nobody else can.

[@davidware1896]

I still own a 2004 Forester XT with 250,000 miles. Good car. Everything still works.

[@angelgjr1999]

David Ware is the turbo reliable? Engine cylinder and throttle stays clean? Thank you for information.

[@Alyssasrealm]

"Head gasket is gonna get you..." - I hope not.

[@Designs033]

I own a 2002 xt jdm with 91k km, all stock ony had to fix the AT solenoid

[@A_Degenerate_with_Glasses]

The older Forester XT is faster than the newer Forester XT. The 2014-2016 Forester XT is faster than the 2017-2018 (Dumb people complained about the CVT so much that Subaru programed them to feel like automatics which made them slower; this is why we can't have nice things). The 2004 - 2007 Forester XT (USA) are fastest foresters ever built (For America, cuz Japan kept the STI trim to themselves); they are literally Subaru WRX wagons/SUVs and that is awesome. The 2014 Forester XT has some problems, but 2015 - 2016 models fixed them. The 2004 - 2007 Forester XT (USA) can do 0-60 at around 5 seconds or slightly above, the 2014 - 2016 Forester XT can do 0-60 at around 6 seconds or slight above, and the 2017 - 2018 Forester XT can do 0-60 at close to 7 seconds. If you want a cheap DIY wagon/SUV that leaves many people in the dust, you get the 2004 - 2007 Forester XT (USA). If you want a fast SUV that can outrun or make a owner of a base model Porsche Macan and BMW X1 question their purchase, you get 2015 - 2016 Forester XT or a 2006 - 2012 Toyota RAV4 V6 (small SUV with a Toyota Avalon engine). If you want a fast SUV that can outrun a lot of SUVs that are under the 30K - 40K MSRP (and bully faster SUVs by tailgating them), you get the 2017 - 2018 Forester XT.

[@musasizigodfreydixion6231]

How many liters of gas does it consume per 40 kilometers?

[@SERGUMUM]

The old one has more character.

[@deenabarham8172]

Serg Orton ffbv"xhc,cod y5u5g5gtfr sttetcd5aytyf

[@Alyssasrealm]

@@deenabarham8172 Just wait patiently only a little while yet, and the thought-to-text systems will work better.

[@paatakvikvinia8279]

сколео стлит

[@paatakvikvinia8279]

сна селлео стоит

[@BaddaBigBoom]

Agreed ..I have one.

[@franciscodanconia45]

I have a 2007 SG Forester and I wouldn’t trade it even up for a new one. I LOVE that car.

[@homeimprovementsubaruguy2556]

That was from the Subaru Nirvana years. things started to go downhill in 2009 and 2012 saw the last decent Subaru’s ever made. Even the WRX got rid of the legendary EJ motor. So sad😞

[@skyshatter3633]

Got Forester 2000 2.0 125hp and has never let me down i`ll always love it :D

[@angelgjr1999]

Yordan Yordanov My 2000 Explorer v6 has 210 horsepower. Good car but coolant leaks every week.

[@neometalx9]

Didn't know the Forester had a 2.0 version in the past.. The current 2.0 versions are about 152 hp.

[@jargarbo]

To be honest... Both cars are winners in my own opinion. To think that 2004 forester against 2016 and it lived up to whatever 2016 model can do is a feat! Just shows how good Subaru cars are. 12 years later it can still compete with its predecessor. That's just amazing! Subaru all the way!

[@lisakaz35]

Actually I owned a 2001 and recently got a 2008 Forester. Right now I think the 2001 ran better. Unfortunately an accident led to its demise, though it only had 108K on it.

[@musasizigodfreydixion6231]

Old is golden

[@BOOGiNS]

$4000 car vs $24,000 car. I'd say its worth the value

[@simonmamo4177]

Older version all the way! I ve got a 2004, 2.0 xt turbo manual model. Fully speced all stock, no aftermarket additions. Still fully functional and in pristine condition. Would never let go of it even though i have 2 other 2019 vehicles.

[@homeimprovementsubaruguy2556]

I have is brother, a 2007 Outback XT in pristine all original condition. Manual transmission too! Love it!!!

[@Xmvw2X]

This is a great comparison video. It does highlight one key difference that the modern generation has received, traction control. While the old system is symmetrical, it ran an open front diff, an electronic clutch center (for the auto, manual was open center diff), and a very mild viscous rear diff (depending on model, this was also an open diff). The Forester of the old generation was largely an open diff setup that worked well on surfaces with even grip levels (all gravel, all snow, all ice), it suffered when surface grip varied. The STI was the only vehicle in Subaru's lineup that had any advanced differentials added, but unfortunately Subaru never felt any other models, including the Forester, warranted a more capable differential configuration. However, the modern age has worked around this problem via ABS based traction control which in a generalized way mimics locking differentials by being able to read and then stop spinning tires. The only shortcoming is most other manufactures also have this, so Subaru really doesn't have a design advantage. The big difference between manufacturers is with the software tuning of each system. For offroading, the biggest fault one sees is the tuning is too aggressive for cutting engine power. You end up with a vehicle that can't get out of a hole or climb a hill because the tuning cuts enough power too much and will not let any wheels spin. You end up getting stuck even if you could technically get out. Honda's CRV is an excellent example of this problem. Early press cars had a different traction control tune that would allow more wheel spin and engine power. The car was tested to be highly capable. Then Honda tuned the traction control for production and weakened the capability. The same car on the same tests failed instead simply because the traction control tune was overly aggressive and cut too much power. It shows how critical software tuning is for modern awd systems that rely now only on ABS to control wheel spin. It can work great...if it's tuned right. Or it can significantly hinder performance and prevent the car from working as well as it could. Some manufacturers work around this by offering several driving modes including one that lets the driver spin tires and keep engine power. This offers the best compromise if it exists.

[@homeimprovementsubaruguy2556]

Too long, didn’t read

[@musasizigodfreydixion6231]

Thanks for this piece of information.

[@coeniemiddel9703]

Great info.

[@rocheuro]

i got the old one 2003 XT 177 manual and I just love this car so much!

[@bencallahan1412]

the flat 4 boxer of the ej series engines in the 2004 generation significantly drops the centre of gravity, pair that with the low roof line of the sg series of forester and it is very hard to roll over. I have gone sideways at speeds on grass fields and no rollover, no matter how much the wheels dig in. the new forester has a higher chance as the suspension is stiffer and the roofline is higher as well as the weight has increased. Both foresters should have tied in the end with the new forester only winning because it is now a luxury vehicle not a mid sized SUV.

[@Oz888Smoke]

Great review. Thanks for english translation. I own a 2004 Forester XT. 2.5 litre turbo. 255hp. 0-100Kmph under 7.0 seconds, stock, no mods at all. I can't find any current affordable suv's that compare with it's perfomance. Have serviced it as advised from new and has been the most reliable car i have owned. Buying a 2016/17 WRX very soon but keeping my XT.

[@SilverJigProductions]

Yeah, I have no idea what they are talking about saying the 2004 XT shown in this video has 177 HP and does 0-60 in 9.2 seconds. That's the stats for the later model of the same gen, non-turbo. I have a 2006 2.5X (NA) and those are it's stats, haha.

[@Oz888Smoke]

SilverJig - MTB/DJ Action Yeah, unless it's different with the Euro model ? A lot of English Subaru's have smaller engines than we can even get here in Australia. The base model Impreza has a 1.6 litre N/a pissweak engine in the UK, here it starts with a 2.0 litre. I don't understand Euro Subaru.

[@bxyoung]

They never show the engine compartment. Maybe it's just fake badges and hood scoop lol

[@SilverJigProductions]

Oz888Smoke Very true, never thought about that. Glad we get the decent ones here, haha. I'm in Canada. :)

[@Oz888Smoke]

Sly Angelic No, just no.

[@23chicco]

prefer the old one better exterior design

[@iCazZiStronZi]

23chicco i agree but the newer ones are a bit faster

[@iCazZiStronZi]

I hate the fact they took off the hoodscoop, I understand its for fuel efficiency. But I don’t give a shit about fuel efficiency hahaha 🤣🤣🤣

[@sale626]

agree..

[@musasizigodfreydixion6231]

@@iCazZiStronZi Why the need for speed in a family car.Its not a racing car?

[@iCazZiStronZi]

@@musasizigodfreydixion6231 I have a sweet spot for building things like this for exactly that reason, you would never expect to be beaten by something your mom would take you to soccer practice in. I race my Forester for fun in street class, I built it to be fast. Plus the XT is not the ideal family car it’s not super big or spacious and it’s full time all wheel drive and turbocharged so it has HORRIBLE gas consumption the most I get is like 500km per tank if I drive like an old lady lol

[@vincesanhueza]

Awesome video. And great editing and soundtrack. Thanks 😀

[@ahhhyeeah]

The old one would have passed the awd test if it was the Forester "S" model ( it came with a limited slip rear diff)

[@MrKeefrichards]

still take the 2004 model, just loveit.

[@lucyjones6665]

from 10:00 - this is the best AWD testj I have ever seen (and trust me - I have seen a lot).. big thumbs up for this video

[@REVlogue]

Thanks for putting this together. Subaru gained more sales with the newer car, but the older one just has way more character and uniqueness.

[@TAKMAZ29]

This. I have 2005 forester and also 2017. But 2005 is something else. It feels really unique.

[@LJHuang-jn8bj]

A great review and comparison on previous and new generations of same model, FORESTER. Thks a lot.

[@glendree1]

Excellent comparison Great review. Thank You!

[@cojo1801]

Good video ! I Appreciate the translation to English Thank you. I really like the comparison and, would like to see more real world differences in tests between generations of vehicles. It's great buying advice

[@rocheuro]

I just bought 2.0 XT 2004 Forester last week for cheap as chips!, and I absolutely love it! Seriously no other currently made cars can come close! leather, great interior, absolutely FABULOUS Audio system (looks cheap but it plays absolutely fantastic) and 8sec acceleration, .. love it. Silly thing but current Forester XT around 240 BHP semi-auto (eco friendly) is only 0.5 sec faster than my old genuine 2004 forester XT 2.0 Turbo manual !

[@neometalx9]

I thought 2004 xt only had the 2.5 xt, the newer ones are 2.0

[@tctokster99]

@@neometalx9 JDM model's had the EJ205 that had more power than the USDM model's, Just ordered an 04' Forester 2.0L from Japan!

[@rocheuro]

@@neometalx9 2003 ! sorry ! 2003 XT 2.0 Manual.. amasing car.. brought it from UK, and its working on LPG second year now.. everything works perfect! even A/C is perfectly working frosing cold!. and it is better than most modern cars

[@rocheuro]

@@tctokster99 is 2003 XT 2.0 Manual 177bhp a EJ205 engine ? it is 8.3 sec.. and latest forester XT Auto 238Bhp is 7.5 sec / 100kmh

[@7homas0wen]

Old one looks better on the exterior and new one looks better on the interior

[@beyonder1918]

Great job! Your channel is awesome!

[@bmoore8853]

I own SG Foresters myself, both are 2004 with STI upgrades and supporting mods (turbo, up and down pipes, Cobb AP, IAG AOS, fuel pump, cylinder #4 cooling mod, oil pan/pickup tube/baffle, intercooler, gauges, transmission cooler for auto, intake for auto, mishimoto radiators, and i'm sure a bunch of other engine related stuff), basically full-bolt on cars with custom tunes, one auto and one manual, the auto having over 250K miles now and still my wife's daily driver, I drive the manual daily now.... both my absolute dream cars. I work for a Subaru Dealership and love showing the new STI owners my cars and letting them just drool for a few minutes before I close the hood and let them stare at my complete sleeper that cops don't give a second glance at as they tail the STi owners for miles to catch them going 6mph over the speed limit. These are the closest cars to a legal rally subaru car that was ever produced. They have a Factory 2" Lift on a Subaru Impreza Wagon Chasis with a EJ257 longblock engine, stronger early sti rods with a WRX Turbo, Intercooler, Exhaust and tune. Hell it even came with STi fuel injectors. NOT putting the VF39's into them would have been stupid! Oh, and just for the number hunters, auto is 224whp/276wtq and the manual is 275whp and 295wtq. Everything that bolts up to a 2004 STI either does, can, or with very minimal modification to surrounding components will fit onto a 2004 Subaru Forester.

[@josefabreckterfield8867]

Yeah dude the sgs are sick I got one half a year ago and blew the motor but put a 2016 sti short block with head studs and forged internals. Also have the vf48 turbo, 1050 injectors, full Cobb exhaust, AP, cold air intake, killer b pick n baffle, stainless valves on the heads, just waiting to get a new tune so I can rip it around

[@Thomas22may]

I have a 2004 Forester 2.0x with 133k miles on, everything is spot on, love my Subi to bits :D

[@frankmaster2213]

Old version is still the best no matter wat.

[@toot1231]

My daily driver is a 2005 Forester XS with 210k miles on it 0 issues at all got it for 2k$ and just love it

[@orical2832]

Great review guys!!

[@robs246]

Thanks for the effort great work, we have owned three and are stopping at the 2012 as the engine reduced back to 2.0 L and CTV Transmission, the CTV are very hard on oil and require a synthetic and chain slippage creates metallic wear debris, it is a simple trans though, regrettably the 2012 trans subaru did not fit an oil filter and we had to fit one to the oil cooler line

[@ghostindamachine]

What a great car review :)

[@francisfreyre]

Very interesting show off! Thank you.

[@jimlee3725]

Rear seat is adjustable, just go find that wire. Did you use X-mode when testing on rollers?

[@seanrodrigofaria7420]

very nice tutorial video ..I am buying the 2006 version because of you guys ..

[@seanrodrigofaria7420]

I agree on what he said (the newer one is emotionless)..

[@peterorzechowski8300]

Have you fit the same brand new tyres on both of them, so the test for breaks and for Elk test/Moose test will be more relevant? Apart of that, Test is done really well and very interesting. Thanks

[@stevenphotog4594]

Nice job on the review.

[@Vishnukaniyan]

Thanks for the English translation. Great review, subscribed for more content like this.

[@WernhartWeisser]

Very good comparison, it is very complete and objective. It has interior and exterior design, AWD capabilities, acceleration, braking distance, slalom and more.

[@oddities-whatnot]

I like the later shape but think the older model looked the best. It was a tough looking beast.

[@CCdion23]

Borat is such a good narrator

[@jaym4290]

Very good review thx for the English translation

[@michaelhueber4701]

Briliant video ! Tks!

[@irinaagnes1250]

Awsome! Greetings from Romania! Prowdly owner of a 2.0X 2003 Subaru

[@1776adb]

Put a hood scoop on the 16 and I'd take it hands down.

[@sarreta01]

The appearance of the oldl one is more authentic for me. I have bought one from a friend and I’m delighted with my new old car. 🧐

[@situmapw8219]

Great stuff

[@DoubleJThe]

My mom would love the 2016! I'll stick my 06 XT 6MT. Not sure what Russian spec cars have (not nearly the same power as USDM cars), but mine's got a viscous center and rear diff, it'd never get stuck during the roller tests...Unless maybe both rear wheels were on the rollers and the wrong front was on the ground.

[@sakarbik7535]

👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏 Subaru is Legendary. Now and then. The Best SUV ever. Period. 👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍

[@Dylanesque]

I had a 1998 2.0ltr 1st generation Forester. It did everything the manufacturer said it could do on the box. I'd have another tomorrow but the dealers selling the few available are either too pricey or carry a very high mileage. Sometimes both.

[@nirmaluae]

Nice comparison

[@alexanderthegreat3674]

Is there a difference in the awd between a manual and automatic in the 2nd gen? I thought i read something about that somewhere

[@ks10308]

9:55, price? I dont know how it's like in Russia, but I just purchased a fully loaded 2017 Forester XT Touring for $38K.

[@ValHazzard]

the old one just looks so much better and more agressive.

[@musasizigodfreydixion6231]

Yes the 2004 is more aggressive.

[@UltraVi0lett]

I like both of them :)

[@andrewjackson7476]

My 05 XT Forester (U.S. 2.5 li w 28mm Hitachi turbo) did quarter mile in 13.8sec 0-60 5.2sec and 0-30 in 1.3 sec. No ferrari at that time even came close to 1.3sec in 0-30. It looks like this 04 XT either never came with rear viscus limited slip diff or was all worn out. Even though viscus diff are so much inferior to torsen/gear-type limited slip diff, the subaru units (even the non performance units) were particularly effective. I remember having all three wheels off the pavement, cuz the car was high sided on snow, yet one of the rear wheel's contact with the snow was enough to pull out.

[@ericbaratta1338]

Would have been good to see what you ended up doing with that (weird) external wire for CarPlay

[@craigt9415]

To all the people butt hurt by the fact the 2017 isn't an XT. Forget about speed, majority of owners buy the Forester for it's AWD not it's drag strip potential. The fact that the old forester holds up as well as it does and can still beat modern suvs and crossovers OFF ROAD is where Subaru shines.

[@veganpotterthevegan]

Pretty sure the old XT's were AWD too😂

[@dkphantomdk]

now that is odd.. my simple Impreza 1.5R will do first and sekond test with no problem. I tryed to lift the wheels on one side with a forklift.. it did move..

[@KNIGHTRACEDOTCOM]

EXCELLENT REVIEW THE 2020 FORESTER WILL HAVE TURBO I AM TOLD...

[@itftcomputers]

The old forester needs a gearbox/diff replacement it doesn't work properly for sure. All the foresters are able to perform off-road in fact the oldest models do it even better than the new ones due to the smaller weight and more older models had an LSD as well.

[@kikomach3]

the funniest part is the "Hyundai TUCKson"

[@felipebrigard3115]

Do you have a video comparing 2015 or 2017 with last ones ? I think the off road capability in the new ones is a lot worse. Great videos thanks !!

[@2hpreview]

On this channel we have Forester vs Honda kzbin.info/www/bejne/l2rYl4GAnpV3ps0

[@mrmdennis1980]

The Auto does not give equal power to all wheels, however, the manual does. Test a 2004 manual on the 3 wheel test!

[@hampuslytz5393]

Still open front diff, and LSD rear. Still same problem with 3-wheel test. And I have a 2004 FXT manual ;)

[@HazenGrass]

1st and 2nd lock on the automatic transmission puts it in 50/50 front, rear

[@BruceHoult]

@@HazenGrass they say 50/50 torque split but that's rubbish. It actually just locks the front and rear drive shafts together which gives equal *speeds*. The torque comes down to how much resistance each wheel meets: rollers or ice = zero torque. And you still need either a LSD or active braking of the slipping wheel to get torque to the wheel with grip. (Light manual foot braking at the same time as accelerating can help -- the handbrake won't)

[@themightiness]

They made the new forester so much bigger it's not even the same class of car anymore so the comparison isn't super fair. The old forester is closer to the new XV when you look at size, weight, etc.

[@skippertara]

That was an objective review..

[@Thomas-vm4vd]

My father have the forester of 2004 and it's better than the new because he have low and hi gear

[@CM-ef8fu]

The music is so annoying... But the comparison really good :-)

[@rapalaron6348]

I own both a 2006 2.0 liter manual gear and a 2010 2.0 liter automatic gear Forester. The 2006 model with the high and low gear is by far the best Forester.

[@TAKMAZ29]

I think 2003-2005 forester are the best ones. Much more reliable. Also I don’t like the bigger headlight that came with 2006 forester.

[@lusibabrads6626]

The old is the Best

[@OjaysAdventures]

Comprehensive review but apples to apples... should have compared the old with the new forester XT... the test used the old naturally aspirated 2.5L engine in the new forester (not an XT).

[@undergroundlegend198]

You are not serious, old forester xt sprints to 100km in less than 6 secs, get your facts right

[@quentinguillout3414]

This is a 2.0xt in the test, not the 2.5xt which can do 6s. But I was surprised as well, I thought it would be around 7s

[@Designs033]

why do they always say tall peope have a hard time fitting in the fozzy, iam 6.5 feet (198cm) and it fits like its made for me,

[@Paul-67]

Thank you for that review. Good English translation as well. I have just purchased a 2006 2.0X auto Forester 48000 miles and although down a little on power compared to turbo models it is good enough. I am impressed with your review of the 2 Foresters from different generations, very real world. Paul in Stoke on Trent, England.

[@aaronsempa5820]

Miss the frame less doors

[@Phil-cz8vc]

Wow after seeing this i want a 2nd gen now XD

[@dominikbibic5394]

On real offroad, old forester is better than new forester, new forester sucks because it has cvt that cuts power, old has standard auto or manual, the difference is biggest on steep hills or rutted out hills, old foresters also had low range on non turbo models( only MT)

[@homeimprovementsubaruguy2556]

Where is the law written that beautiful things must become ugly?

[@lawrencebeloy4593]

in my opinion , both are good

[@nelc2399]

the 2004 have more aftermarket parts and STI parts to modify

[@pakhoyik9259]

Is It the old car useing new shock?

[@locomoco2670]

10:15 - What happened to the VDC system? °-°

[@rambo4war]

Amazing that a $1200 forester kicked that $40k SUVs butt; decision all but made on that real world metric.

[@giacotubo]

what about Subaru Forester model III?

[@doodskie999]

you should use the 2.0 turbo 244hp

[@xzero8565]

смотрел это. отличный обзор-сравнение.

[@dolfowolfo1]

Good review! I ended up getting a 2010 Forester XT with 18,000 miles on it :). I believe Subaru ended up reinforcing the head gaskets in the XT models to help prevent the previous issues people could have. Also - did some countries get the XT with still 170HP? The reviewer/translator mentioned that number for the "older forester".

[@SqkTap]

i have one of each 😎

[@kartboarder22g17]

10:02, amazing car, people should take note that are out to purchase a Rav 4 or CRV.

[@adamdisalvo9247]

All this is telling me is keep my old one but replace it with the new drive shaft also a better steering rack which I'm going to put the 2015 still one in and I still have money left over compared to buying that one

[@bernardhossmoto]

Awesome car, but they should get rid of the CVT and offer a real automatic. Also, the old design was much better, love the slot in the hood.

[@aceshaban]

I have a 2004 XT with symmetrical AWD it even has a sticker for it on the boot windows, also I make 0-100 in 6.7 seconds not 9 like the video says

[@brold6111]

Old subaru wasnt able to pass 3 rolls trst because it was an automatic

[@mclovinu69]

I don't understand people's obsession with electronics on newer cars. So what! I would much rather have a nice swiss made automatic wristwatch (which I own) then the latest iphone watch (made in china) which will be redundant in a couple of years time

[@Nbomber]

As for the awd test, it depends on the spec of the old forester. Most have open diffs, the later automatics could lock the centre diff, and the sti is LSD front and rear, with an electronically controlled torque biasing centre diff, which should very easily pass the test.

[@natecurrier]

Well done video. But I think you should've compared apples to apples, and used a new XT.

[@BucketOSyrup]

That is the new xt

[@BucketOSyrup]

Search for 2016 forester, look at the front end. Now search for the 2016 XT and look for the front end. This is the XT

[@paweslusarczyk1056]

the new XT can be recognized easily by the slats in the front bumper. This is the XT.

[@natecurrier]

I am in the US and my 2016 XT has this bumper in the video, however this model in the video is foreign (to me) and has the non-turbo engine (the reviewer states that it's the 2.5 engine).

[@paweslusarczyk1056]

Javier Puig OK then, you are correct. I wasn't aware that the 2.5 is available outside of the USA

[@ozzyribas8448]

2004❤️

[@MrCorsar32]

I think they should have taken the 2007 Forester XT to compare with the new model. It is faster, it still looks good and it can pass the 3 rollers test, which is shown in this video: kzbin.info/www/bejne/pXq7mX2KatSmotE 0-60 in under 7 seconds. Yeah, the interior may be outdated, but it has good quality.

[@wilkinramirez433]

Tengo una 2009 forester y estraño mi 2003 anterior forester la sentia mejor de manejar tenia mas estabilida

[@quartier5571]

My Forester XT 2017 has 250 HP and 258 torque. 0-100km/h in 6.2 seconds. And that is in Canada and US. This video makes confusion by the design !

[@bennylloyd-willner9667]

I would so much have liked to watch this but with an overpowering back(fore?)ground music and two languages talking at almost the same volume at the same time I just can't do it.