Chicago
Well-Known Member
I ordered the turbo for the better acceleration and torque that being said I’m still waiting to get mine 105 days and counting which really sucksOh really? That's special!
By way of comparison (yeah, I know it ain't a Jeep), Subaru's 2.0L turbo (which they've discontinued in the Forester) gets less mpg than the brand's standard, naturally aspirated 2.5L engine. I've driven and owned both. I averaged 24-25 mpg overall with the turbo and hit a high of 33 mpg during a long (1000+ miles) road trip, so I edged out the EPA estimates. I usually do, but then, I don't drive like a moron who's in a hurry to get nowhere. However, any savings that might be realized are erased and then some because of the cost of 93 octane fuel (not required but strongly recommended). I'll ad that every Forester I've owned (three, including the turbo) has been bulletproof, but none were gas misers.
I'm not dissing the folks who want the turbo, but they need to do it with eyes wide open. The premium they pay for it comes with more "premiums," like gas that's at least half a dollar more per gallon, more frequent (and hence costlier) routine maintenance, and an as-yet unproven engine in the real world.
You pays your money and takes your chances. And my 3.6L is still bigger than your 2.0L.
Sponsored