Subaru Forester 2002 vs Subaru Outback 2003
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Body: | Crossover / SUV | Estate car / wagon | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Crossovers and SUVs have better off-road capabilities (higher ground clearance, can have 4x4 drive), they are preferable for driving on unpaved roads and rural areas. Also, the driver's seating position is higher in a crossover or SUVs, which provides better visibility also in city. This usually comes at the cost of higher fuel consumption, increased weight and higher maintenance costs. | |||
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
| Engines: | 2.0 - 2.5 | 2.5 - 3.0 | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 125 - 230 HP | 165 - 245 HP | |
| Torque: | 184 - 320 NM | 226 - 297 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 6.3 - 13.4 seconds | 8.5 - 10.9 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.5 - 11.0 | 8.5 - 9.8 | |
|
Subaru Forester petrol engines consumes on average 0.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than Subaru Outback. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.45 m | 4.73 m | |
| Width: | 1.74 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.58 m | 1.54 m | |
|
Subaru Forester is smaller, but higher. Subaru Forester is 28 cm shorter than the Subaru Outback, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Subaru Forester is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 406 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Subaru Forester is 0.2 metres less than that of the Subaru Outback. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 1`844 | ~ 1`840 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | high | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 2600 | 2600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
|
Subaru Outback has
| |