Subaru ‘e’ Forester, Outback X: All the dirt on old school and new

Two core models thrown into the mire; one the last version of an old favourite and the other first of a new electric generation … which does best in an environment potentially ignored by too many owners?

Which Subaru to chose … the Forester E-Boxer Hybrid (left) or the outback X?

all images: Callum Crawley.

Outback X

Price:  $49,990
Powertrain and performance:  2.5-litre four-cylinder horizontally opposed petrol, 129kW/ 235Nm. CVT automatic, all-wheel drive. 7.3 L/100km.
Vital statistics: Length 4820mm, height 1675mm, width 1840mm, wheelbase 2745mm. Luggage 512 litres. Wheels: 18-inch alloys.
We like: Excellent final fling, has aged well.
We don’t like: Does achieve all updates meted Forester.

Forester Premium E-Boxer Hybrid

Base price: $54,990

Powertrain and economy: 2.0-litre four-cylinder horizontally-opposed turbo petrol , 110kW/196Nm (12.3kW/66Nm electric motor), CVT, AWD, 6.7L/100km.

Vital statistics: 4625mm long, 1815mm wide, 1730mm high, 2670mm wheelbase, luggage 509 litres, 18-inch alloys.

We like: Strong spec, tough look, rigged ambience.

We don't like: Lacks zap, fails to show economy gain, inconsistent ergonomics.

‘COULD do better’ – I saw that one more than once in teacher comments in my school reports.

And, of course, they’re right: I really was a bit of a slacker when it came to some subjects. I’m sure I’m not alone, however; many mates of the period say the same, or worse, on their assessment cards.

In adult life, perhaps, there will be those of us who have owned Subaru products developed to exploit off-road opportunity might give ourselves a similar rating when gauging how we might have under-utilised our cars. 

I’m as guilty as any. As much as  our 18-year-old Forester, aka the ‘dog car’ simply because it’s the chosen canine conveyance (though it could equally be known as the ‘firewood’ car, the ‘paddock car’ and the ‘towing garden detritus to the fire heap’ car) gets to undertake a fair degree of dirty work, I cannot admit to the same occurring with the current-gen Outback turbodiesel, now gone to another owner, we had for a couple of years.

That one rarely went far off the seal and, in hindsight, that’s something I’m slightly ashamed to admit to, given the quality of the torque. But somehow best laid plans never quite eventuated. The best, tackling a Central Otago gold miners’ route, was foiled by a really basic self-perpetrated navigation error. I missed a vital turn to Thomson Track and by the time I realised … well, there was no time. Shame, it would have been brilliant.

As much as it’s always easier to take risk with an old car, worth little, than with a new one, still worth a lot, fact is that when it comes to core competencies, the latest is probably a whole lot more likely to safely see its way through. 

Subaru NZ always makes an effort to include off-road driving whenever they release a product; so I know first-hand that same Outback is great in the sludge (also in Central) and the Forester, too.

 Both cars are specced lavishly, the Forester full to bursting for safety and conform spec, yet that doesn’t diminish their toughness, save that you might like to put down some floor coverings to protect the carpet.

 Generally, speaking, you could take either into the rough with equal confidence. When you’re discussing the models in their standard 2.5-litre formats, they deliver the same symmetrical four wheel drive, have identical 22cm ground clearance, mate to a continuously variable automatic transmission (CVT) that kinda mimics an eight-speed gearbox and run the same Bridgestone Dueller tyre.

Forester is shorter, yes, has slightly superior approach and departure angles and weighes slightly less, but there’s not a lot in it.

However, the stakes keep changing, don’t they? Now there’s an Outback X and e-Boxer Forester, each arriving with type-specific technical changes.

With Subaru’s largest family wagon, though just in this specific variant, the X-Mode off-roading kit has been enhanced to match one the Forester has always had.

 In achieving the same dual settings for snow, dirt and mud – one a continuation of the format that will be known to Outback drivers, the second a more advanced setting – the Outback X provides a taster of what will become standard on the new-generation Outback, already out in America, coming to New Zealand next year. Conceivably, it should make this car even more adventurous off-seal.

Forester, meantime, is out on a new electric crusade that the larger won’t be drawn into. The hybrid format demands a big alteration; lifting out the usual 2.5-litre petrol shared with Outback and supplanting in an electric motor and batteries in marriage to a 2.0-litre petrol.

It’s a big change, no argument, and one already determined, from trying it in the XV, is objectively found wanting in road driving; in particular, it struggles to achieve the economy improvements you’d expect from a petrol-electric and doesn’t feel as muscular as the alternate engine. How much help would it provide in low-grip, off-seal situations?

Only one way to find out. The drive plan for each included visiting a common playground. A farm on which a course was laid out. A 25-ish degree grassy climb that’d be ascended from a standing start, a slushy gravel pit, some paddocks and a rutted gravel track.

They ran the same route, but never physically crossed paths. Test period timings were almost a month apart. Crossing fingers about conditions being broadly uniform seemed to work.

I’m indebted to Tim and Karyn Crawley for allowing me onto their property and also to their son, Callum, for the excellent photographs and assistance.

Their beef and sheep farm is no stranger to off-road fare; the Crawley business in Palmerston North, Autokraft 4x4, specialises in off-road parts and preparing vehicles. Tricked out to the extreme with Old Man Emu suspension, air-operated diff locks, with a winch and plenty of other gear, Callum’s Toyota Hilux was trailing, ready to become the perfect rescue vehicle.

It was never called into action. While the conditions underfoot were hardly a doddle, with each car slithering from time to time – particularly on the hill start, where they both lost grip as soon as the grass was ripped away –Subaru’s AWD really proved its mettle.

The X-Mode too. A system that constantly monitors the traction available to each wheel and centralises control of the engine, transmission and brakes is really intuitive. It’s impressive how even the CVT is brought into line, to the extent that it ‘holds’ what passes for a gear.

However, in saying that, it became clear that the first stage, which is the one Outback has in every other variant, was better in the specific conditions encountered that the ‘deep mud/snow’ alternate that has been added. Strange as it might sound, the latter cried out for softer conditions. On the relatively firm ground I was driving, it was often just too aggressive in its interaction.

Yet X-Mode is a great asset. You might argue if it makes a ‘serious’ off-seal vehicle all the more serious – because that logic asks that you see either model as being that to start with – but each setting clearly operates in different and distinct manner. So much so, that, when once fails to do the job, chances are the other won’t. 

Ultimately, though, while it had to be driven more carefully in deference to its size and less agreeable overhangs, the Outback X shone as the more proficient car. It’s agility and get-through aptitude was impressive; it never felt as if it was exerting to the limit and, in fact, was more dextrous in one area than the Hilux. Wow.

The Forester, on the other, was troubled – and, since conditions on its day were slightly better than they were for the Outback, that’s hardly reassuring.

But findings were sobering. First, and most obviously, it lacks initial oomph. Also, when power does come on, it arrives untidily; the lay-in is abrupt and usually occurring much higher in the rev range than with the Outback’s 2.5, with end result that it falls far more easily into going-nowhere wheelspin.

Dissection of the drivetrain relates why. The 2.0-litre develops 110kW at 6000rpm (as opposed to 129kW from the 2.5) and 196Nm at 4000rpm in this application, while the electric motor has peak outputs of 12.3kW and 66Nm. Add those together and it looks strong. But Subaru doesn't quote a combined total of 122.3kW and 262Nm, like some might assume.

In fact, it doesn’t give a combined figure at all. So, you cannot assume one-plus-one equals two or even that it potentially makes more torque than a more conventional 2.5-litre Forester, which delivers 239Nm. 

Indeed, it very likely does not. Something else cropped up. On road, the electric and petrol work in tandem; you sometimes feel an extra jolt of oomph when the electrics join in. With our farm driving, you’d swear the battery-compelled drivetrain was always off-line. Inevitably, then, it came across as a large car with a small engine that always felt (and, ultimately, smelled) as if it had to work harder to haul more kilos – which it is. The e-Boxer carries 67kg more than a Forester 2.5 in the same spec. And that’s with the hybrid losing its spare wheel, to open up stowage space for the battery.

That’s not to say it isn’t up to expeditionary status. All the same, you’d probably prefer the Outback: It’s no less nimble and, in delicate driving conditions, is less likely to spin those tyres and more likely to deliver strength when it’s required.

 In on-road driving, the e-Boxer Forester provisioned much the experiences as the e-Boxer XV; the electric drive system is generally doing something to supplement the petrol engine, but it’s never enough. Brand contention about it being up to powering the car in EV mode at up to 40kmh never happens; in general, the engine is kicking it at walking speed, not matter light-footed you try to be.

When both work as one, the powertrain is still not as good or smooth as a 2.5-litre Forester; performance is mostly adequate but no more than that. Ask it to accelerate briskly and it struggles; not just because it lacks pep, sometimes there’s a defined lull before the power even arrives.

When the XV was on test, every effort was made to achieve good economy, but largely to no avail. No effort was put into driving the Forester that. It was just treated to the same kind of driving as the Outback. The economy came out remarkably similar; an indicated 8.7 L/100km average from the Forester and 9.0L/100km from the Outback. 

It’s a shame the hybrid isn’t better, because this is the right direction for Subaru and, had it worked, would have been a great off-set to the opinion their boxer engines are more hungry that in-line types. They really aren’t, and they’re also more characterful, but perceptions are hard to shake. Doubtless some will see the ‘e’ badge alone as presenting enough validation for buy-in – especially if they’re a corporate striving to do the right thing – but, with a colleague having worked out you’d needed to clock 380,000kms’ to offset the premium, it’s just too hard to recommend. 

A pity. As with the XV, the one benefit from having the hybrid gear is that it improves the ride. This Forester feels softer and more compliant than the other. Avoid hoofing it and general refinement and noise suppression are good as well. 

Also, of course, if you exempt this powertrain, the Forester generally excels. That NZ Car of the Year title afforded when the range comprised just 2.5-litre models was well-deserved. It’s a roomy and well-equipped car, even if some of the safety watchdog stuff – the lane keep and driver awareness reminders – are way too over-zealous.

So, back to the Outback X, and what a graceful way for this model to exit the sales stage. Sure, this experience reinforced what own ownership period told me; it’s not in any way an athletic car, but it does have a real grace about how it drive. The suspension provides a docile ride, and its steering is accurate and easy to manage. It’s just a great car for long distance travelling. As this outing reinforced, it’s also a better off-road car than many will give it credit for being. The couple of hours spent on the farm really left me ashamed that I hadn’t tried harder with the version I owned. If anything, the diesel – through having so much ow-rev torque – would have been even better than the X. 

On the other hand, I cannot help but think Subaru has left the best until last with this special edition.

As an effective run-out car – though it’s not called that – it certainly does a good job of keeping up consumer interest.

It only dresses up a bit, yet the ingredients of a bespoke paint job, black treatment of its 18-inch alloys, grille, wing mirrors and rear badging, lime green accents on the side badges and grille really lift its kerbside appearance.

Dropping leather on the seats for a cloth is also not the retrograde move you might imagine it to be; the seats are more comfortable and the material, being water-repellent, is arguably more practical.

So, in this report card, only one deserves a ‘could do better’. Whereas the other will leave the scene having done more than enough.

Subaru XV Sport e-Boxer: Enough meat or Greens?

If you’re imagining Subaru’s first hybrid is going to be a revelation, best sit down. With only minor improvements in efficiency and responsiveness applied to a model that’s dating, it’s challenging to see the point.

Price: $42,490

Powertrain and economy: 2.0-litre petrol four-cylinder with electric motor, 110kW/196Nm (12.3kW/66Nm electric motor), continuously variable transmission, AWD, combined economy 6.5L/100km, CO2 161g/km.

Vital statistics: 4465mm long, 1800mm wide, 1595mm high, 2665mm wheelbase, luggage capacity 345 litres, 17-inch alloy wheels 225/60 tyres.

We like: Improved ride, coherent hybrid-specific graphics.

We don't like: Fussy drivetrain antics, no ‘wow’ moment with hybrid engagement, XV design has dated quickly.

NOW the count of cars with potential to replenish partially – as, by virtue of a plug-in hybrid set up – or wholly (so your full electric car) -is significant enough not to be ignored, where do mild hybrids stand?

The brand that changed the world with the Prius and put more than 15 million hybrids on the world’s roads insists mild hybrids will remain relevant for years yet. Toyota’s conviction is great news for Subaru, given it’s also now taking the same path as the global giant.

Interestingly, as much as the e-Boxer inserting into the XV driven here, in entry Sport trim, and a more expensive Forester variant represents a giant leap for its maker, it might nonetheless appear something of baby step in the overall scheme of electric things, if not also off the pace set by others.

Really? Well, it’d be an insult to Subaru’s engineers to call e-Boxer primitive. Yet let’s just suggest it’s hardly fortunate for its rollout to occur so soon after the RAV4 Hybrid, a certain sector rival despite some price disparity. If you’re set on the Subaru star, comparison with Toyota’s similarly-pitched product won’t help. The latter is far more advanced. 

Toyota stands mention because it owns about a fifth of Subaru Corporation, the company formerly known as Fuji Heavy Industries, they also obviously co-operate (86/BRZ) and are partners on an electric car project.

It’s some surprise, then, to hear Subaru claim e-Boxer to be entirely an in-house concoct and that all the brands share is a common philosophy centred on using a combination of petrol and electric motors – capable of running individually or in tandem – to reduce economy and emissions (and without the need to charge the vehicle via a plug). When you are buddies with the world leader, you’d think every opportunity to use their talent would be taken, right? And yet …

Subaru’s claims for the degree of improvement from this driveline are hardly outrageous; they cite a 14 percent improvement in fuel efficiency over the equivalent petrol model on the urban cycle and a seven percent improvement on the combined cycle. They also cite an official overall full burn of 6.5 litre per 100km; which is nothing to brag about when in the company of a Prius or RAV4 hybrid owner and is just 0.5L/100km sharper than the official combined figure cited for a regular XV.

That’s in optimal conditions. What’ll it do in a ‘real world’ application? From my experience, not a great deal of improvement over the regular model, at least not in the environment I exposed it to.

Running up a couple of hundred kays in a mix of country and urban running delivered an average of 7.6 litres per 100km. A regular edition, with effectively the same engine, I’d driven several weeks prior over similar circumstances returned 8.3L/100km: So, in those circumstances, the hybrid remained 1.1L/100km shy of its optimal whereas the regular model was 1.3 L/100km off shy of its own target. 

That suggests it’s easier to get economy from the hybrid. But it also impresses the advantages could be slight. Even if it bulls-eyed the factory claim, logically it will take years of ownership to recoup the variant’s $5000 premium. Also, it’s obvious the hybrid’s overall range will always be lower, because the electric drivetrain’s implementation asks for 48 litre fuel tank, whereas the regular car has a 68 litre tank. (Quirkily, cargo volume increases, from a 310 litres to 345).

Of course, the picture is bigger than just fuel burn alone. Emissions were lower from the e-Boxer, but not much: 147 grams per kilometre against 159 according to manufacturer figures.

So far, so damning? Well, while the overall averages were less worlds apart, there were specific instances when the e-Boxer appeared to be operating far more efficiently than the pure petrol, even if it wasn’t always when I expected it.

Hybrids are renowned for being most effective at fuel-saving around town, where they can rely more frequently on their electric motors.

From my exercise, though, the XV e-Boxer’s sweetest spot on the move appeared to occur when it was driving somewhere around 70kmh; an awkward area when most speed jurisdictions are either 50kmh or 100kmh.

 The other scenario where it also leans down is when its literally crawling. So, if caught for prolonged periods in very slow traffic, it’s potentially not a bad friend. Around where I live, ‘rush hour’ at its worst lasts about 15 minutes.

So is it worth it? Not really. Above that, there’s the question of whether you even want the XV to start with. It’s no longer a particularly new product and, despite continuing improvement to the spec, has patently been left behind by the Forester, let alone quite a few cars from other makers, in how it drives and presents. The origami styling hasn’t aged particularly well, either. It’s simply not Subaru’s finest effort. And I say this from viewpoint of being a brand fan; we still own a older Forester and had the current Outback for a while.

If you are going to buy in, be assured it’s at least a simple science by hybrid standards. A powertrain married to an electric motor fed by a lithium ion battery that operates mainly in tandem, but occasionally in isolation, is hybrid 101. No driving modes to manage the motor’s performance and the paddles behind the steering wheel have not been repurposed, as so often occurs, to alter the strength of the regenerative braking. Pull those and you’re moving through the pre-set change points built into the CVT.

The battery isn’t huge; outputs in isolation are 12.3kW and 66Nm of torque. Self-charging using regenerative braking energy. It combines with the engine to produce a total output of 110kW at 6000rpm and 196Nm at 4000rpm; that’s identical torque as you get with the regular XV but 5kW less power. This all feeds through a drivetrain that’s Subaru tried and true. So, permanent all-wheel-drive system and chain-and-pulley CVT, though the latter is slightly recalibrated.

The rationale for Subaru calling it a ‘motor assist’ tech and enforcing that it is more of a supplementary unit than a primary driver made increasing sense as the test progressed. For the most part, the system’s imprint was subtle. 

Well, except with the starting process. That’s bound to be surprising to those used to other hybrids, in that going straight-to-electric on activating for a silent roll-away, forward or reverse, never occurs. It’ll do that stuff when the car is fully operational, yes, but at initial firing it’s always the petrol engine that kicks into life – and with quite a cacophony when cold. Going straight into burning hydrocarbons; where’s the Green ‘wow’ in that? 

Time with the standard model imprinted that this engine is probably the most raucous of Subaru’s current crop of horizontally-opposed units; as much as I enjoy a good boxer burble, it’s just not a particular refined unit; the harder you rev, the louder it gets. The implantation of electric assistance lifts its manners, but not enough. It’s not a smooth experience and with the power band being narrow and a CVT that’s quite anxious to involve it can be a juggling act to keep it operating quietly and calmly.

Also, for the most part it barely feels any sharper than the non-assisted variant. The modest contribution to accelerative responsiveness is most evident with light throttle applications. Under intense acceleration – such as for overtaking – it sounds and feels no less strained.

Keeping a weather eye on the display dedicated showing the ebb and flow of the power feeds is fascinating. Even in general daily driving at even speed, contribution can be incredibly sporadic and fleeting. Don’t imagine you’ll always catch the sequence on the schematic indicating when all the handovers occur and don’t take it for granted that the electronic warble the car emits when it is running in EV mode below 24kmh won’t continue momentarily into the period when the engine re-engages.

The best chance of achieving a feel of the car being in operation on electricity alone for forward propulsion comes when you build up pace, then lift off the throttle. The engine will shut down, allowing for emissions-free coasting which, along with braking, helps replenish the battery, a process it will signal with the green ‘EV’ light illuminating on the driver display. But not for long. On anything but an ascent, though, the interaction is usually brief, perhaps just 20 seconds at most, before the car slows to a point where it needs a jolly up.

So what, then, of the proposal it can accelerate on electrons alone up to 40kmh, depending on factors? Well, good luck. Try as I might, I found it impossible to prevent the engine kicking in at anything beyond parking speeds. And kick in it does; the transition is far from subtle, with a noticeable shunt from the driveline as the engine sparks to life and the CVT flares its revs in anticipation.

Subaru’s crossovers build their reputation on being adventure wagons. You’d hope at least most owners would use them as such and, while the XV isn’t as rugged as a Forester or Outback, it does okay in its standard format.

How about the e-Boxer? Well, the positive is that the incorporation of the electric kit doesn’t seem to impinge on the design overall. Yet neither does it add to the car’s beyond-seal talent. That seems to me to be a missed opportunity. Recognition that battery-fed drive offers intriguing benefits when negotiating tricky scenarios is set to be exploited by Jeep and Land Rover. Towing also reduces. The hybrid and regular models should tow up to 650kg unbraked, but in braked situations the hybrid peaks at 1270kg, against 1400kg.

Even in situations where the hybrid is taking a back seat, other tech is working to make impression.

Subaru has really stepped up on driver assist systems and while Sport trim, as the entry level, doesn’t lend the whole package, apart from the obvious absence of Vision Assist that monitors driver behaviour and alerts to fatigue, but the main element of the core EyeSight technologies it is design to supplement are in place. There’s a Front View Monitor that compensates for the lack of front sensors, a reversing camera and Lead Vehicle Start Alert lets you know when traffic has got under way. It also has an autonomous emergency braking system, lane-departure warning and lane-keeping systems.

Graphics are quite basic, and the main menu’s set of icons look incomplete unless Apple CarPlay or Android Auto has been hooked up, which is requisite for using navigation. The screen is responsive, though.

The XV’s interior is soundly built, but is also struggling to sell itself for ambience; even though there’s decent tactility to buttons and dials, it is skewed toward functionality over flair, burdened by cheap plastics and though less busy than the Forester cockpit, is also less attractive. All sorts of clues point to it being from an age we are now fast departing; for instance, a centre console storage area that seems sized for phones of the 1990s rather than 2020s and the USB points for cellphone integration is awkwardly located.

The XV Sport trim delivers on 225/60 R17 rubber and handling attributes with or without the battery set seem similar, save that the electric encumbered models additional kerb weight – 1576kg versus 1474kg – does seem to make it a bit less sharp in cornering. That’s only really noticeable in extreme situations though and, as is common with cars of this ilk, the hybrid actually has improved ride quality; the benefits from the additional low-set weight reflect in a car that is less bothered by surface imperfections. That’s a plus point as the XV in standard form can feel a touch overly firm. Steering weighting is well judged, though a vague on-centre feel arises. Like all Subarus, it feels confident and safe on loose surfaces.

I’d have trouble recommending an XV these days and would all the more reluctant pointing anyone to the e-Boxer. The technology works, but from my experience it doesn’t do anything near enough to make a persuasive difference. And what will hurt Subaru’s chances with it is that there is at least one other model in this sector that can deliver more coherently, even if it costs a bit more.

While it’s good to see Subaru taking its first hybrid steps, it’s also really apparent they should have phoned a fri