
The Forester's primary weaknesses are its lethargic powertrain, noisy cabin, and a frustrating touchscreen interface. The standard 2.5L engine feels underpowered for highway merging, the CVT transmission is often noisy, and real-world fuel economy lags behind hybrid rivals. High levels of wind and road noise are common, and the large touchscreen complicates basic controls while being prone to glitches.
A core complaint centers on its lethargic powertrain. The 2.5-liter four-cylinder engine produces 182 horsepower, which is adequate for city driving but becomes a liability during highway passing or on steep grades. The engine must rev high to deliver power, a sensation exacerbated by the standard Continuously Variable Transmission (CVT). Many drivers describe the CVT's operation as a "rubber-band" effect, where engine RPMs flare and hold while acceleration builds slowly, creating noticeable noise and a disconnected feel.
Real-world fuel economy often disappoints despite favorable EPA estimates. Because the engine and CVT frequently operate at high RPMs under load, actual MPG can fall 2-4 mpg below the window sticker, especially in mixed driving. This places it at a distinct disadvantage against competitors like the Toyota RAV4 Hybrid, which can deliver significantly better fuel efficiency in similar conditions.
Cabin noise is a persistent issue. The Forester's boxy, upright design, while excellent for visibility, creates substantial wind noise at speeds above 55 mph. Road and tire noise are also more pronounced than in key competitors like the Honda CR-V or Mazda CX-5. This compromises the long-distance cruising refinement many compact SUV buyers expect.
The infotainment and control layout is a significant pain point, particularly in models with the 11.6-inch vertical touchscreen. Critical functions like climate control adjustments are buried within touch menus, requiring more driver distraction than traditional physical buttons. Owners commonly report system lag, unresponsive inputs, and occasional freezing, which undermines the technology's utility.
Common complaints vary by model year, highlighting recurring and new issues:
| Model Year Range | Key Reported Weaknesses |
|---|---|
| 2019-2024 | Sluggish acceleration, CVT noise and feel, cabin noise. |
| 2023-2024 | Infotainment system glitches, overly sensitive or intrusive lane-keep assist. |
| 2014-2018 | Excessive oil consumption (some engines), older infotainment system. |
Ride quality can be firm on rough urban roads, and the interior, though practical, uses harder plastics that feel less premium than some rivals. The EyeSight driver-assist system, while generally effective, is noted for occasional false forward-collision warnings triggered by shadows or overhead bridges.
Ultimately, the Forester excels in visibility, standard all-wheel drive, and cargo utility, but these strengths are counterbalanced by a powertrain that feels outdated, a noisy cabin, and tech interfaces that prioritize form over function.

I’ve driven my 2022 Forester for two years now, and the engine noise is what gets me. It’s fine around town, but get on the freeway to pass someone? The engine just screams. It feels like it’s working way too hard for a simple lane change. My friend’s CR-V is so much quieter and smoother in the same situation. The big screen looks cool, but trying to adjust the fan speed while driving is honestly dangerous. I have to take my eyes off the road for too long. I love the way it handles in snow, but I wish the everyday driving experience was more relaxed.

As a family car shopper who cross-shopped everything, the Forester’s powertrain was the deal-breaker. The salesperson highlighted the safety ratings and cargo space, which are fantastic. But on the test drive, when I needed to merge onto a busy highway with my kids in the back, the lack of immediate power was genuinely concerning. The engine revved high but the car didn’t surge forward confidently. For a vehicle in this price range, that’s a fundamental flaw. We also found the rear seats, while spacious, were a bit flat and lacked support for longer trips. We ended up choosing a vehicle that traded a little cargo space for a much more confident and quiet powertrain. The Forester is a practical toolbox, but it’s not a refined family cruiser.

Let’s talk about the tech, because that’s my jam. The giant vertical screen in the newer Foresters is a classic case of over-design. They’ve moved the climate controls—things you adjust constantly—into a touch sub-menu. There’s no tactile feedback, and the screen can lag. In winter, you just want to crank the heat without navigating a menu. I’ve also had the unit reboot spontaneously twice. The EyeSight system is great in theory, but mine has “seen” braking threats in highway overpass shadows, causing a sudden, alarming beep and brake jerk. For a brand known for sensible , these tech choices feel like they prioritized a minimalist look over actual, reliable usability. It adds unnecessary friction to the driving experience.

My perspective comes from keeping cars long-term. I owned a 2016 Forester for seven years. The renowned reliability had a caveat: it burned about a quart of oil every 3,000 miles, which I learned was a known issue for that model year. I loved the practicality, but the long-haul ownership experience was mixed. The resale value is strong, which is a major plus. However, the cabin materials wore noticeably—the armrest coating peeled, and various plastics squeaked over time. The constant road noise on my commute became genuinely fatiguing. When I replaced it, I missed the visibility and the go-anywhere feel, but I didn’t miss the lack of power or the interior noise. For a long-term owner, you’re trading some refinement and potential for specific mechanical quirks (depending on the year) for incredible utility and durability. It’s a trade-off you need to go into with your eyes open.


