Nicely done on the review guys. A couple of things I'd like to offer an opinion on are: 1) you mentioned cargo space and said that the Outback actually had slight less interior volume than the Forester does. I've been looking at both of those cars for a number of years now and technically, that's true, but what I've found is, the Foresters advantage comes from it's added height. The Forester is taller than the Outback but if you compare the load floor with the rear seats folded down, you'll find that the Outback is deeper from front seats to the tailgate. In others words, the Outback has more floor space than the Forester does. Where the Forester has more room is essentially above the window sills and for most folks, myself included, that's not space we generally use. For item 2), you talked about how peppy the engine felt. When I drove an Outback a couple of years ago, I was surprised by that too but what I think they're doing is programming the drive by wire throttle to give that effect off the line. It makes the car feel like it's stronger than it really is because of how fast the throttle tips in with just a little movement of the gas peddle. It's not a big deal really, but it gives false impression of what the car is ultimately capable of. Either way, I totally agree with you that the base 2.5 engine is more than adequate for most of us.
.
