There’s an ancient proverb that goes something along the lines of “May you live in interesting times,” and it’s a backhanded wish if ever I’ve seen one. In between moments of “What did Kanye say now?” and the latest unwanted AI integration, many of us wish we lived in less interesting times. While we can’t control history, we can control our own actions, and the new Subaru Forester is a compact crossover for people searching for predictability.
It’s not going to rock the boat, it’s not going to knock your in-laws’ socks off, and it probably won’t be on the cover of Time. What it will do is be a Forester, whether you’re upgrading from a 2018 model, a 2008 model, or even a 1998 model. This hugely popular crossover is for people who know what they want, but how does it fare against stiff competition? Let’s find out.
[Full disclosure: Subaru Canada let me borrow this Forester for a week so long as I kept the shiny side up, returned it with a full tank of fuel, and reviewed it.]
The Basics
Engine: 2.5-liter naturally aspirated flat-four.
Transmission: Continuously variable transmission.
Drive: All-wheel drive.
Output: 180 horsepower at 5,800 rpm, 178 lb.-ft. of torque at 3,700 rpm.
Curb weight: 3,535 pounds (1,649 kg).
Fuel economy: 26 mpg city, 33 mpg highway, 29 mpg combined (9.1 L/100km city, 7.2 L/100km highway, 8.3 L/100km combined).
Base price: $31,415 including freight ($36,170 Canadian).
Price as-tested: $39,430 including freight ($45,674 Canadian).
Why Does It Exist?
The compact crossover segment is one of the biggest in the world, so it’s no surprise that the Forester is important to Subaru. It was the company’s second-best-selling vehicle in America last year, behind only the Crosstrek. Considering the new one didn’t arrive until the second quarter, those are solid sales figures, so yeah, the Forester is a pretty big deal.
How Does It Look?
Did you know that for the past 28 years, Subaru has rolled out a new Forester every four to seven years? If you aren’t a Subaru diehard, probably not, because each one somehow seems to look barely distinguishable from the previous one. This evolution isn’t an act of laziness, it’s one of preservation. People buy Foresters by the truckload, and if familiarity is what consumers want, sometimes familiarity is what they’ll get. Think Porsche 911, but for people who wear Birkenstocks.
As such, the sixth-generation Forester is about 9.2 percent more handsome than the model it replaced. The surfacing in profile’s been Oxi-Cleaned, the rear lighting is more cohesive, and the down-the-road graphic includes a single mask formed by the headlights and grille. Add it all up, and you get a design that won’t set the world alight nor offend anyone. Mission accomplished.
What About The Interior?
While other automakers are striving for material consistency, the team behind the Forester hasn’t been quite so bothered. This one comes with wood trim above the glovebox but nowhere else, a little bit of sueded textile on the door cards but nowhere else, and a herringbone vinyl shift boot that seems extra scrotal for some reason. At the same time, the top of the dashboard seems to feature far more parts than several competitors, potential cause for concern in the long run when it comes to shut lines with the potential to rattle. Oh, and the driving position is a bit bus-like, and the front seats could use a touch more support.
Still, look beyond some of the fine details, and there’s lots to love about the cabin of the Forester. For one, it’s roomy, with 1.6 inches more rear legroom than a Toyota RAV4 and 1.3 inches more rear shoulder room than a Honda CR-V. The armrests feel like sinking your elbows into beanbag chairs, the cargo area is appreciably large and square, and then there’s that one interior trait that costs nothing yet doesn’t technically come with the car. It’s light.
See, the pillars in the Forester are thin, the greenhouse is tall, and the sunroof extends to pretty much the middle of the car, imbuing it with an airiness you just don’t get from competitors. If Subaru fitted a dual-panel panoramic moonroof to the Forester, it would legally be classified as a mood stabilizer by the FDA, so long as the sun is shining.
How Does It Drive?
Pop the hood of a regular Subaru Forester and you’ll find roughly the same sort of 2.5-liter flat-four Subaru’s been using since 2011. It’s gained direct injection and higher compression over the years, but output stands at an unremarkable 180 horsepower. As you’d probably expect, the FB25D engine provides whelming motivation, aided by remarkably good CVT programming. The unit in the Forester is happy to ride the torque curve, only letting revs soar when truly necessary in a bid to dull the noise from the uninspiring flat-four. Then again, fuel economy in the Forester is subpar. Although this CUV is rated at 26 mpg in the city, I averaged around 23 mpg combined. Not great, but it means that the newly available hybrid powertrain ought to make a world of difference.
As for the ride and handling balance, it tips firmly toward ride, because Subaru’s gone with comfort over everything. Freeway potholes are reduced to the dull audible thwap you’d imagine a wacky waving inflatable tube man would make while being kissed by an F-350 at 90 MPH, and driveway curb cuts may as well not exist at all. In an age where many luxury cars will make you want to dial a physiotherapist, focusing on ride quality is absolutely the best move for most drivers. The tradeoff for such memory foam comfort is that perceived stability during evasive maneuvers exceeds that of several barstools, but is nowhere near the level of a Hyundai Tucson or Mazda CX-5. Still, actual grip is right on par with competitors, so sit back, take it easy, and enjoy a serene if vague drive with fingertip-light steering.
Does It Have The Electronic Crap I Want?
If you’re familiar with modern Subarus, you’ll already be acquainted with the 11.6-inch portrait-style infotainment screen fitted to this Forester. Alright, it washes out a bit in direct sunlight and wireless Apple CarPlay can be a bit slow to pair, but physical volume and tuning knobs along with real temperature control buttons add some modicum of physical controls. I do wish actual buttons for the heated seats existed instead of tiles in the infotainment, but they are always top-level, so it could be worse. Plus, my test car came fitted with a decent Harman/Kardon sound system that requires a little equalizer fiddling to bring the mid-range back to flat-ish, but has plenty of punch.
As you’d expect from a brand obsessed with safety, there’s a full suite of advanced driver assistance systems on deck here, and they all work pretty well for the most part. The automatic emergency braking early warning system can be a little hyperactive, but only on occasion, and only in the heaviest of fast-moving traffic.
Really, the toys to note inside the new Forester are all things that some automakers have ditched completely. Real gauges, real physical door handles, real buttons on the steering wheel, a manual shade for the sunroof, familiar elements that have worked for decades. If you’re trading in an older car for a new Forester, you probably won’t need to do a ton of learning, which is nice.
Three Things To Know About The Subaru Forester
- Real-world fuel economy might not live up to expectations.
- Outward visibility is outstanding.
- It has plenty of ride but could use a little more handling.
Does It Fulfil Its Purpose?
The Subaru Forester isn’t the best-driving or nicest compact crossover you can buy, but it seems perfect for commuting. While driving is thrilling, with open roads, driver and machine working in harmony, and a journey on the mind, commuting sucks. It’s all potholes and bumper-to-bumper traffic, the sort of conditions that favor an easy rider that gives you a great view of everything. If you like tech and near-luxury refinement, the Hyundai Tucson and Kia Sportage are probably more your speed, and the Mazda CX-5 and CX-50 offer a more engaging driving experience, but if you like Foresters, you sure won’t be disappointed by the new one.
What’s The Punctum Of The Subaru Forester?
It’s a safe, comfortable mid-pack bet in the compact crossover segment, but you might want to wait for the hybrid.
Top graphic image: Thomas Hundal
Support our mission of championing car culture by becoming an Official Autopian Member.
-
The Japanese-Market Subaru Forester Goes On A Cladding Binge And The Results Are Astonishing
-
Why The 2025 Subaru Forester Hybrid Is The Only Forester You Should Even Consider
-
This Is The 2026 Subaru Forester Wilderness Before You’re Supposed To See It
-
This Is The 2025 Subaru Forester. You Might Want To Wait A Year Before You Buy One
Please send tips about cool car things to tips@theautopian.com. You could even win a prize!
If Subaru came out with a design as groundbreaking as the old SVX it could double its sales overnight. But for now all we get is plastic fantastic.
I disagree completely. What makes Subarus great is their utility, simplicity, and evolutionary progression. A “groundbreaking” design would be a lead balloon with Subaru.
I do agree with you. I recall admiring a then new SVX along Rivers Avenue in N Charleston SC at the local Subie dealer. It sat there for a looooong time, like well over two years. It was a groundbreaking automobile but too much like the XT and too weird for the Subie purists. But remember, Subaru used to have a wagon with a cyclops headlight in the front grille did they not?
Great, another boring CUV, maybe it’s time for a shakeup, how about an actual wagon?
Need to change the economy regs to make not-light-trucks viable. Until then the gas or hybrid powered coupe, sedan, and wagon aren’t coming back exception: halo vehicles.
Quoting wikipedia: “Under federal regulations, crafted with heavy lobbying input, cars must meet tougher emissions and mileage rules than light trucks. Vehicles that have larger “footprints,” measured as the area between the points where the wheels touch the ground, are allowed less stringent emissions standards. A less than 1 square meter increase in the footprint of a vehicle allows for 2% to 3% more carbon dioxide emissions.[4]”
Here’s The Convoluted Way The EPA Decides What Is A Car And What Is A Truck – The Autopian
Getting rid of CAFE sounds good to me. No matter what side of politics you are on I think we can all agree it’s poorly done and needs replacing.
I bought a ‘25 Forester about nine months ago and have been very happy.
My assessment:
Very comfortable seats, best if any car I’ve ever owned.
Very quiet cabin, very comfortable and compliant ride.
The engine is smooth and quiet and the transmission tuning is really good. Power is perfectly adequate and the power train is linear and responsive.
As stated, bright and airy cabin with great visibility.
It’s not a sports car. It’s not supposed to be. I think it’s the perfect road trip vehicle. Chose it over a CRV.
The Forester is great but an Outlander may have been overlooked and quite possibly could have been a better choice. Low dB inside, much more modern interior and just plain looks significantly upscale.
Maybe it did, before they facelifted it with the Joker’s grin.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/27/2023_Subaru_Outback_Limited_XT_in_Crystal_White_Pearl%2C_Front_Right%2C_08-22-2023.jpg/1920px-2023_Subaru_Outback_Limited_XT_in_Crystal_White_Pearl%2C_Front_Right%2C_08-22-2023.jpg
We bought the last manual transmission Forester in Maine, 2 generations ago,, back in whatever year that was. 2018? Clearance enough for the ruts when headed down first heaved back roads and gravel roads to get to a trail head and the road to get to our camp, blah blah blah. The real reason we got it over the competitors was the greenhouse. I’m tall. I see things in this car, which is amazing, and I don’t feel like I’m trapped in a coffin. The sun roof makes it even better and brighter. Oh, and four wheel drive in winter sure does wonders (and we are in places off the main roads with plenty of snow, often enough, so it matters). We are the target audience, and it’s been a perfectly fine appliance car. Nothing special, and that’s why we bought it. Chances are we will get the hybrid when this one dies in another 7-10 years.
I had a 2012 CR-V for 2 years, it was my ex’s daily. Two things I hated the most:
She got a Forester to replace it. It had its issues but visibility and traction were not among them.
What happened to the people who designed the third gen Legacy, SVX and the first Forester?
I dont know but I hope they’re doing well, wherever they are.
They retired 10 years ago.
A friend of mine just bought a new ’25 Forester, after their Crosstrek got to be about ten years old (it’s a first gen Crosstrek, though the all look very similar). It’s a safe purchase if you value practicality more than driving entertainment. Their Crosstrek had to have the CVT transmission replaced at least once under warranty (maybe twice, I can’t recall) but I’d assume Subaru’s current CVT is a bit more durable than it was ten years ago. Which doesn’t make me want one, even if true. 😉
If my car had to have the transmission replaced under warranty, not sure I’d be buying another car from that manufacturer.
That’s like saying because your car ran out of gas you’ll never buy another one. Driven long enough by its owner(s) EVERY vehicle will need a replacement transmission especially if is an automatic or CVT. There are many parts inside a transmission assembly that are BY DESIGN made to wear out and will eventually fail. Clutch discs or plates (manual or auto), gears and planetary assemblies.
Of course, if it happened at 15k?
Many, many old Toyota 4×4’s running around nearing half a million miles on the original trans. Automatic trans failure is just not a topic ever discussed in any of the Toyota groups I belong to.
My buddy had a 20-year-old GMT800 truck that was essentially falling apart around the original engine and trans when he got rid of it at 300K miles.
Funny, because the Aisin transmissions are one of the weakest points in most 5-cylinder Volvos.
Well, when I was a kid, my parent’s Plymouth and Oldsmobile both went through transmissions like some rich guys go through wives, but yes, we don’t expect that so often now. I gather that Nissan CVTs are the least durable, and that some Subarus also have it as a known failure point.
Those first-gen Crosstreks were available with manuals, but (as mentioned?) she doesn’t drive stick so CVT it was. A small price to pay for domestic bliss I suppose.
My former roommate’s ’12 Sonata blew its Theta before 100k miles. Her parents got a brand-new Sonata to replace it. Clearly you don’t think like the average consumer.
I’m always surprised that our commentariat has such strong opinions about normie cars. I genuinely don’t feel any strong emotions towards any of them, because they’re not designed to elicit any. They’re appliances, although I do have a begrudging respect for cars that fulfill their purpose flawlessly, and as a result I do tip my hat to certain NPC mobiles, particularly the new-ish CRV.
Anyway, this seems like a perfectly cromulent car to me, it just depends on what you’re after. Looks are subjective but I personally think this looks pretty good and it’s certainly easier on the eyes than the busy Hyundai and Kia equivalents. It’s not necessarily class leading in many ways but it offers tons of space and a really good all wheel drive system.
If those are what are most important to you then I wouldn’t hesitate to recommend a Forester. I mean yeah it would be cool if they threw the turbo mill and manual in this but they’d only sell 3 of them so obviously they’ll never do it. At the end of the day this is basic family transportation and it fulfills its purpose.
That being said the hybrid is absolutely the one to get. It’s faster, significantly more efficient, and it has an eCVT rather than an actual CVT which should make for a much smoother and more refined driving experience. I really don’t see any reason at all to get the plain ICE one over it, but then again I’m sure someone will respond with some bizarre use case that the the regular one is better for.
Plus, to me at least this still has a wee bit of character because of its Subie-ness. Not much mind you, but it’s at least a little more charming on fun loving than another gray RAV4 or Equinox or whatever.
Well, even appliance cars can elicit some emotional response, even if muted. 😉 I’d love the early/first gen Honda CRV myself, but those aren’t around anymore short of paying through the nose (and other bodily orifices) via Bring a Trailer or something like that.
There’s also that early (first?) gen Forester… the one that had the 80s-looking fender blisters? Looked much more like a wagon than a crossover. They’re supposed to be slow, and I’m sure any Subie that old is gonna rattle like f-ck, but every time I see one of those early Foresters, I think to myself “damn, that is a good looking little wagon!” 😀
Still have our 1st generation Forester with over 350,000 country and dirt road kilometres. And still commutes 90 kilometres per day along a rough tar rural road. Can confirm that it doesn’t rattle like fuck. Probably because most of the really rattly bits fell off long ago!!
I assume it’s a manual if it’s got 350Kmiles on it. Plus, if something falls off and the car still runs without it, was it ever really necessary in the first place? 😉 Color me envious of your first-gen Forester SBD! 🙂
That sounds like a miserable commute. What’s it like in winter?
Colder. But it never snows here…
I like normie cars. What’s always been disappointing to me, and this Forester shows that in spades, is how sad the specs are in 2025. When a Corolla or Juke can get 40+ mpg (a friend does this without trying, and he doesn’t exactly drive like a WW2 veteran), mid-20s is just not good enough. When smaller or comparable cars get turbos, this gets natural aspiration. The engineering just feels like Subaru isn’t trying and they’re content with performance from 2 generations ago.
Sure, it’s adequate (barely), but they could do so much better, even if all you want is a normie car with good fuel economy.
I’m not mad, just disappointed. A Subaru would be the perfect vehicle for my needs, if it wasn’t a sluggish gas guzzler.
Still has the big sunroof, and it’s still available in green 😀
Sadly, they stopped offering the forest green tho
Okay, I had to consult Mr. Google to be sure what last year’s Forester’s taillights looked like (were they still the crab claws? They were!) but this is bologna. Every time I’ve seen one of these new models, I’ve been driven nuts by the way the bottom edge of the taillights don’t line up in the slightest where the quarter panel meets the tailgate, but not in a way that looks in the least bit intentional. Incredibly, horribly, shamefully bad styling.
Wow. I had to look twice to see it, but now that I have I will never unsee it. Until this moment I thought these looked fine, and a bit improved/refined from the last gen, but that is terrible.
I dont like the new styling. The 23-24 were the best. New style nos:
1 floating roof attempt
2 heat extractors for the front disc brakes.
3 plain jane rear
4 fugly front where the center grill goes up onto the hood it appears.
5 run everything thru the TV screen including the AWD system and seat heat.
It’s been a long time since I read an artful damning with faint praise review. Well done (no /s here).
Can I have my 88 gl-10 instead? Kinda liked the open center diff as you could do a rwd burnout and the cop who sees it yells at someone else. The Forester is too normal.
The outward visibility and airy cabin is the #1 pro of my wife’s 2018. With the light gray interior (and in base spec, so no tinted rear windows) it’s the brightest interior of any modern car I’ve been in that’s not a convertible. For being a cheapo crossover, it’s a pretty pleasant place to been and helps with a lot of the dark and dreary days around here.
I don’t particularly like this generation of Forester, but will say that it’s better looking than the remarkably awkward design from 2019 till this one.
hard disagree. 2019 – 2024 are the best styled. And the ride is Cadillac floaty wonderful. I had an 18- kinda rough. This month’s consumer reports – states it (2019 and on) has the best ride – for the 3rd mention during the last 2 years.
I’m sure it’s better at a number of things, but I find it a bit too bloated. Most of the wheel designs from that era are pretty rough, and I hate the lobster claw taillights. Not sure why, as I do love eating lobsters.
My in-laws just bought one of these. They loved the way it drove, and we live in a part of the country that gets a good bit of snow, so I get it. I just can’t get past the looks of it. They bought the sport model, which does come with some handsome bronze wheels (yay not black wheels!) but it’s just homely.
This current design language the brand has gone with since around 2024 really turns me off. I’ve owned lots of Subarus over the years (04 STi, 04 WRX Wagon, 99 Forester 5-speed, 10 FXT, 23 Crosstrek Sport), but I think after my Crosstrek dies I’ll be moving on from the brand. We’ll keep my wife’s FXT forever because I’ve put a lot of money into that thing to basically restore it (plus I LOVE it). I had been hoping to replace my Crosstrek with an Outback, but I will not buy that new non-wagon monstrosity.
Now with less plastic cladding???
Just bought a Tuscon Hybrid after considering one of these. That touchscreen is miserable and decent trims are just too expensive.
It’s a tall wagon in desperate need of a nosejob.
The large (squarish) opening hatch with an enviable greenhouse are underrated even when they’re called out.
As a commuter, the 180hp CVT does.
But for Fuksake, I wish Subaru offered their vehicles with three pedals for a bit of engagement to spare some of the doldrums of that CVT.
I understand why people bought these 20 years ago when this was a more unique format. But now almost every car is shaped like this one, leaving you with what, exactly, to recommend it? A big greenhouse? An AWD system that’s theoretically a touch more respectable than some?
All I see is a kinda homely box with a mediocre interior, mediocre handling, and subpar mileage from a mediocre engine saddled with a buzzy CVT.
I had no idea we had any other Autopians from Subaru’s actual Marketing Department. That second paragraph was almost the official tagline. And we’re still printing money! /s
Homely Mediocrity. It’s what makes a Forester a Forester.
Let me know where to send my W-9.
It’s cheap, has a reputation for being reliable, safe, and AWD. That’s enough for many
It feels the same. That’s what it is. Many modern cars feel weird or ‘too new’ to a lot of folks. But when you get into a new Subaru and hit the start button you still hear the ‘chuck-chuck brooooom’ of a flat-four springing into life and the windowline is exactly where it’s been for the last decade. Combine that with consistently reasonable pricing and ‘it’s what my parents always drove’ and you build a very strong customer base.
Butch’s Forester, woof!
Needs more Turbo and less CVT
From the people I know with 911s, I’d say the Venn diagram of people who wear Birkenstocks and own 911s has a lot of more overlap thank you think. 😀
My buddy has one of these, last gen. For a while he had a bumper sticker that said “The stereotype is true. I’m into women.” but his wife made him remove it because they started sharing the car around Covid.
For the first 20+ years of their existence, Subaru made cars that were simultaneously good and weird. Some folks, including me, referred to the company as “The Japanese SAAB”.
Nowadays, if you set aside the unusual engine configuration, Subaru builds essentially the same vehicles that everyone else builds. I guess that’s the way to make profits now.
But they make them ugly! That’s their only real claim to fame anymore.
Now they’re the GM Saab?
Wow this is a perfect observation. And it’s sad. I look back on my past Subaru’s, my XT-6 my 02 WRX, those were quirky and interesting cars that were fun to drive. Much like Saabs. Today they are just rubbermaid clad cooperate garbage, much like GM Saabs.
Yoh EGG; You forgot, Saab and Subaru are in the aircraft manufacturing business. The real stuff. The big stuff.
Going to have to disagree that it’s any % more handsome than the previous gen. That front end is a face not even a mother would love. The rest is fine, quite likely the most whelming design on the market if you pretend the face doesn’t exist.
I was going to say the same thing, the Forester seems to have gotten progressively uglier over the past few generations as Subaru seems to be on a “more is more” approach to styling. I think it *feels* not that bad because we all still have PTSD from the new Outback, but this is pretty ugly in my eyes.
That’s a great point though, “could be worse” is damning with faint praise, but it’s better than a lot of cars on the market these days, as many MANY are worse, so I guess it not being an incredibly effective alternative to a stomach pump might be as good as we can expect this year.
Absolutely. Subaru suffers from the same syndrome the outdoor wear/camping brands do: making the gear(/car) hideously ugly for no other reason than because that’s what crunchy hippies inexplicably expect.
brandon- thank you. I thought i was the only one
You are not alone my friend!
Technically it could be 0.5% more handsome.
One test I want the Autopian to add to all Normie Class™ vehicle reviews is folded seat flatness
Park on a level surface, put a 1m/3.28ft piece of flat stock across the joint between the folded seats and trunk floor and measure the degree of slope (use your favorite inclinometer or phone app) or lack thereof as well as the hight of the gap between the bar and the trunk floor at the transition.
No other publication does this and it holds for me, a massively outsized influence on vehicle selection
A couple months ago I loaded up my beater for a camping trip — a 2001.5 Passat wagon, which was otherwise a pretty mundane midsize car at the time, but came with some typical Piech-era levels of obsessiveness that you don’t see much anymore, in any class.
One of them? The rear seat bottoms folded up on a compound metal hinge, 60/40. The rear of these seat bottoms (now facing upward) had three sets of holes for the headrests to be stowed. Then the seatbacks then folded down and rested on their notches against retractable steel prongs under the seat bottoms. The result was a perfect flat load floor, including almost zero lip at the opening. It’s a glorious thing and I’ve only seen it a handful of times at any price point.
Those flip-fold rear seats used to be pretty standard-issue wagon stuff, back in the ’60s and ’70s, but they disappeared from all but a few Euro wagons by the ’90s. Volvo and Mercedes also used them; my old Volvo 850 was pretty neat in that the rear headrests didn’t even have to be removed, they flipped down forward and tucked in underneath the raised seat cushion when you folded down the seatbacks.
BMW wagons, being less utilitarian, don’t bother and as a result don’t have flat load floors, but one feature I love on my E39 wagon is that there are clips underneath the rear seat cushion where you can mount the cargo cover out of the way when you fold the rear seat down. Apparently in the new M5 Touring, the cargo cover fits underneath the load floor when not in use, which is probably even more convenient.
Had this car and didn’t know how much I got used to that until I no longer had this car. God I loved that wagon. Then VW things started. Sold it to a woman who did all her own work – ran into her years later and she gushed about much she loved the wagon. Until the VW things got to be too much for her.
Our Ford Flex had that. The whole thing was sloped relative to the ground below the vehicle, but between the front and back seats was totally flat.
Just curious, why does this detail draw so much attention for you?
To me that fits in the “would be nice but by no means important or necessary” category.
Aside from occasionally needing to do deliveries/pick ups of case lot goods, dog crate(s)
Every time I see the Forester mentioned on this site, I picture Matt Hardigree pulling the “Old man yells at cloud” motion.
I wonder if they requested someone other than Hardigree review the new Forester.