Quote:
Originally Posted by RWebb
what MY's of Allroad have the low range? 2005 & up?
|
Europe only, 6 speed manual only, produced only until Oct 2001. So VERY rare.
Quote:
|
I know the '09 Forester is better than the '07, but did not know about the multilink rear suspension; it is on my list of things to drive. Seriously doubt the interior is as nice as the Audi, but...
|
Interior is not as nice. That's why the Audi was three times as much. But you said it was about function.
Yes, in 2008 when they redesigned the Impreza they added a multilink rear suspension instead of the old strut design. That's what underpins the 2009-up redesign of the Forester too. Made a big difference in ride (esp laden) and handling.
Quote:
|
re cost of ownership - I am getting different opinions on that; naturally, there is more risk to the Audi, but does the $23,000 price premium for a Subaru offset that risk (????)
|
Let's say you drive 15K miles per year (national average) and you get 21 mpg in the Forester and 16 mpg in the Allroad (both EPA combined averages). At $3.50 per gallon over five years, that's
$3900 more fuel with the Allroad.
You'd have 65K more miles on either, under 100K on the '09 Subie and over 200K on the Audi. Resale will be quite different. Cost of repairs should be more on the Audi because 1) it has more miles to start with 2) there are more parts to fail as it is more complex and 3) the parts are more expensive as the car is more expensive. You can argue with 4) you will likely have more repairs with a 2002 Allroad as they are known to have issues.
So cost of entry will be more. Offset by resale value, cost of fuel, and cost of repairs, I think the Subie will easily bridge the cost of ownership gap.
If you were consdering a $45K 2011 Grand Cherokee Overland, then you can certainly consider a $20-25K Subie. If not, then buy what you can afford.
I don't think that '2002 Allroad 2.7T with 150K miles' and 'affordable' are synonymous (esp combined with 'no DIY, I'll pay a shop to fix it').