Subaru Ascent Forum banner
1 - 20 of 28 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I'm considering an Ascent Premium with optional Sunroof. I had an Ascent Premium w/o sunroof as a loaner for 8 days, and it was a great driving car. I had a good chance to drive it in different situation every day, and compare it to my almost 2015 Forster.

I'm concerned about two things that the sunroof might hurt:
1. The mileage
2. The performance
3. The handling (due to the heavier roof).

Can anyone shed any light on this?


Here's my reference research material and data:



1. In this comparison, the premium was faster to 60mph than the Touring. The author attributed this to the weight of the vehicle: https:// www.motortrend.com/cars/subaru/ascent/2019/2019-subaru-ascent-first-test-review

2. Subaru rates the mpg as worse for the low-profile wheels:
subarumedia.iconicweb.com/mediasite/attachments/19MY_Ascent_specs-FINAL.pdf
Fuel economy city/highway/combined (mpg) *manufacturer’s estimated numbers
  • 21/27/23 for 18” wheels
  • 20/26/22 for 20” wheels

3. Subaru notes the weights difference of each of the 4 models, but not the Premium with optional sunroof: https:// www.subaru.com/content/dam/subaru/downloads/pdf/brochures/2020/ascent/S-00833_20ASCb_rX.pdf

  • Ascent: 4,430 lbs.
  • Ascent Premium: 4,451 lbs.
  • Ascent Limited: 4,515 lbs.
  • Ascent Touring: 4,603 lbs.

How much weight does the sunroof add?
What does the Touring have that makes it heavier than the Limited?


Thanks,
KR1
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
108 Posts
You're splitting hairs. Talking about less than a 200lbs difference on a 4500lb vehicle. I would imagine the Touring weighs more because of the leather interior, moonroof, and a few other bells and whistles. The mpg difference is likely due to the slightly different wheel/tire combination and the 3.7% weight increase. But once again, splitting hairs. In real world conditions you wouldn't even notice a difference.

If you're really that concerned about it, don't get the sunroof or the larger wheels.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
No, I want the sunroof. I want the 18" wheels.

Here's the excerpt from the article:

"In our acceleration testing, the Premium hit 60 mph in 6.9 seconds and ran the quarter mile in 15.5 seconds at 90.9 mph. The Touring, however, posted a 0-60 mph time of 7.3 seconds and a quarter-mile time of 15.8 seconds at 89.2 mph."

If that's repeatable, then that's a big difference. I'm looking for more data.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
108 Posts
Ok now I really know you're kidding with us because I know you're not seriously concerned about the 0-60 time difference of .4 seconds and 1.7mph in a 3-row family SUV.

It's the weight. Its difference of an adult sitting in the passenger seat while you're waiting for the light at the drag strip to turn green.

Just stop.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
680 Posts
This is a 15-second (at best) vehicle - and you're talking a 0.4 second difference in the sprint to 60. :)

Are you always going to be doing the stoplight-sprint with a near-empty tank? When was the last time you checked your tire pressures? How heat-soaked was the test-vehicle, and how can you guaranty that you'll always have plenty of cool air coming into those giant ducts in the front of the car (look up the datalogs of anyone on LGT.com or search up the old threads of David Buschur's work on the second-generation WRX/STi for just how much difference that intake charge can make)?

You are also just as likely to get a "factory monster" as you are to get a lemon.

If you're really interested in performance, you'll either want to look at a different vehicle that might be faster for the money (that Pilot in the test beat even the best time for the Ascent by well over a half-second, and the new Explorer has a scorcher version for under $50K, IIRC) or, alternatively, pursue cracking the ECU to truly re-tune the car.

Heavier is always going to exact a toll - the physics of the equation are undeniable.

But unless your last name is Unser, Schumacher, McRae, or similar, the likelihood that any of these differences will truly manifest over the huge range of variability that our typical daily drives will expose our vehicles to will most likely not be something that you can actually discern, without the aid of actual data acquisition (forget the stopwatch).

Prove it to yourself - take a test drive and tell the salesperson that the performance of the vehicle is tremendously important to you: I'm betting that he/she will let you do at least a half-dozen 0-60 sprints. Have them time the runs for you, and just for kicks, before they tell you what the times are, venture a guess and record that, too, so you can not only see if there are any actual differences, but also whether your perceptions match up with reality. :)

If you want the moonroof, get the moonroof.

If you want 18-inch wheels/tires, get those, too.

Don't let those fractional differences make you lose sleep. It's not worth it. ;) We're not talking a special edition of the vehicle that gives you a "push-to-pass" option that expends a bank of batteries for an extra boost or even just a version that has more raw power under the hood (i.e. WRX versus STI).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
108 Posts
But if we overnight some parts from Japan it could totally be a 10 second car!
 
  • Like
Reactions: capaz04 and TSiWRX

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 · (Edited)
Ok now I really know you're kidding with us because I know you're not seriously concerned about the 0-60 time difference of .4 seconds and 1.7mph in a 3-row family SUV.

It's the weight. Its difference of an adult sitting in the passenger seat while you're waiting for the light at the drag strip to turn green.

Just stop.
Alright. I apologize for my language earlier. It was not a mature way to respond.

Obviously, I look at this differently than you. I've driven a lot of cars, and I know that the difference between observed speeds that I mentioned is significant to me. I don't understand why people would go to a car enthusiast forum and troll a researched question.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 · (Edited)
If you want the moonroof, get the moonroof.

If you want 18-inch wheels/tires, get those, too.

Don't let those fractional differences make you lose sleep. It's not worth it. ;) We're not talking a special edition of the vehicle that gives you a "push-to-pass" option that expends a bank of batteries for an extra boost or even just a version that has more raw power under the hood (i.e. WRX versus STI).

Thank you for your thoughts. I'm not losing sleep. I'm just seeking data. There's not much in Fuelly.com because it's such a new car. But, these comparisons from other people help me get an idea of what's going on.

For instance, since the car is so high, a heavier roof might affect the handling. Of course I will test drive. This message -- these questions -- are to get other's actual experiences.

The 0-60 doesn't matter, from a stop. It's simply a matter of this reviewer taking note that one of his vehicles was slower. But, if other drivers have detected a pattern in wheels or tires that they observed a difference with, or loaners with certain features that they observed a feature with, then I want to hear about it.

Here's an example: A competitor to the Ascent is the VW Atlas. It has either a V6 (AWD or FWD options) or a 2.0 turbo with FWD. Several reviewers prefer the base 2.0T because it's better on gas and has better torque, vs. the more powerful V6. I appreciate observations like that, because I won't get to thoroughly test as well as they did, and I might have missed that.
 

·
Registered
2019 Ascent Limited
Joined
·
801 Posts
I'm concerned about two things that the sunroof might hurt
1. The mileage
2. The performance
3. The handling
  • 21/27/23 for 18” wheels
  • 20/26/22 for 20” wheels

  • Ascent: 4,430 lbs.
  • Ascent Premium: 4,451 lbs.
  • Ascent Limited: 4,515 lbs.
  • Ascent Touring: 4,603 lbs.
If one of the two things you are concerned about, from your list of three things, is gas mileage I can say from experience that the extra weight doesn't matter.

What matters with milage is how you drive and where you drive, those two thing make the difference in EPA mileage ratings between trim levels irrelevant.

My Limited's real world weight right now has to be pushing 4,700 pounds with the sun roof and all of the stuff I'm carrying around but my real world gas mileage always exceeds the EPA ratings for any trim level.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TSiWRX

·
Registered
Joined
·
108 Posts
Oh quit trolling me you stupid prick. It's a $30+K car. I'm going to ask questions and get people's real experience, and filter through your BS. Either you can answer the questions without "I imagine" or you leave my questions alone.
Lol well theres no need to call names. You might hurt someones feelings! I'm not hardly 'trolling' you. I offered simple, reasonable explanations to your questions regarding the ever so slight differences in the the performance characteristics of the trim levels. What you're considering a 'big difference in performance may be true if you were comparing sports cars. But you're not. And there is quite a bit of mpg data on fuelly.

As TSiWRX said, get out and test drive the vehicles. But take all the data that you read with a grain of salt. One reviewer may say 6.7 seconds and another may say 7.1 seconds, for the same vehicle. One person may say 24.6mpg and another will say 22.1mpg.

Your driving experience and expectations will likely greatly differ from the person on YouTube test drive everything from a Mercedes to a Kia. The numbers only tell a small part of the story, and the numbers you should be paying attention to are different if your comparing high performance sports cars or 3-row AWD SUV's. That's all. Good luck.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TSiWRX

·
Registered
Joined
·
266 Posts
Here's an example: A competitor to the Ascent is the VW Atlas. It has either a V6 (AWD or FWD options) or a 2.0 turbo with FWD. Several reviewers prefer the base 2.0T because it's better on gas and has better torque, vs. the more powerful V6. I appreciate observations like that, because I won't get to thoroughly test as well as they did, and I might have missed that.
I'm one of those. I couldn't get the 2.0T with all the options I wanted, they came only with the V6 so I chose the Ascent instead. The turbo engine gives you something naturally aspirated engines can't: maximum torque that you can actually use all the time (at low rpms). The V6 has more power, but only if you use the engine over 5000 rpm you get to experience that extra power. So what's better? For me its the turbo, when I drive I hardly ever exceed the 4000rpm mark.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
820 Posts
Plain and simple ,the bigger the wheels the gas mileage per gallon will suffer.Along with the other goodies in the Limited/ Touring models gas mileage will differ compared to the Base/Premiums.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
776 Posts
Wow, that went downhill rather quickly.....


Heavier trim level, more unsprung weight with the larger wheels. 200 lbs on the roof of a performance car will make a difference, on a 4500lb SUV or family vehicle it's largely irrelevant.

And take the fuel mileage with a grain of salt, I'm lucky to get 23 mpg on the highway at 68 mph with the cruise on, except in rare occasions. I coast to every stoplight, and am extremely easy on the throttle, and my overall average is still ~18 mpg with 30/70 city/highway (my mpg is worse than my turbo v8 gls 450). I have no idea how anybody gets above the rated numbers, but my car is a sample size of 1.

I don't think you'll find the car lacking in power or acceleration, I haven't, even coming from a big v8. And considering the way the magazines test ( load up the torque converter) acceleration, it isn't really representative of how most of us drive daily. A few tenths is sample variation, even among a model or trim level.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
50 Posts
We can stick a STI badge on it and call it a day. I ask heard putting racing stripes adds 5HP per stripe.

Just kidding. Trying to lighten up the mood. But yes, OP’s question is a very unique one.
1163
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
680 Posts
Thank you for your thoughts. I'm not losing sleep. I'm just seeking data.
Data is my game - I'm a basic-science researcher by trade. :) I understand where you're coming from: yet at the same time, I'm worried that you're putting too much value on what is essentially anecdotal "data."

There's so many variables at-play even with modern enthusiast magazine/website instrumented testing (chief among these is simply the number of samples that they are able to truly test) that I don't honestly think we can call it "data." Maybe a trend, but even that's a stretch.

This is why we call it "benchracing" in enthusiast circles, right? :)

There's not much in Fuelly.com because it's such a new car. But, these comparisons from other people help me get an idea of what's going on.
As others here have noted, how you drive - to include not just your driving style (including idle time and number and weight of passengers [and cargo]), but also seasonal differences (both in terms of environmental conditions as well as differences in fuel composition) and terrain will much more drastically affect your real-world numbers.

For instance, since the car is so high, a heavier roof might affect the handling. Of course I will test drive. This message -- these questions -- are to get other's actual experiences.
You'll also want to sit as low as possible, if you're really concerned about this.

But again, yes, will weight that's higher up cause the vehicle to handle differently ("worse"). In controlled testing, it certainly will, as the physics are undeniable. But unless you're hooning the car as much on public roads as you are on a race-track or skid-pad - and you have a butt-dyno as carefully calibrated as that of professional or high-amateur race-car drivers', this is not something that you'll truly notice just hopping around the block for groceries/gas, as you tackle that on-ramp with the gas-pedal pinned or on that cloverleaf off-ramp.

Either you're not letting on that you are a highly skilled driver (and this comment was not meant to either be denigrating/condescending or tongue-in-cheek, I mean that) - or you're having unrealistic (and unsafe) expectations. FWIW, I'm just an average-Joe, but I've driven on a race-course as well as skidpad, and street-driving, even at its most aggressive, does not approach such limits until you're well outside the bounds of personal (not to mention even public) safety.

Here's an example: A competitor to the Ascent is the VW Atlas. It has either a V6 (AWD or FWD options) or a 2.0 turbo with FWD. Several reviewers prefer the base 2.0T because it's better on gas and has better torque, vs. the more powerful V6. I appreciate observations like that, because I won't get to thoroughly test as well as they did, and I might have missed that.
That's two completely different drivetrains......

The Ascent currently dose not offer a hotter/performance variant.

As with others here, I've had faster - and much faster - vehicles in the past, both unmodified and modified. My wife's current and immediate-previous vehicles are/were WRXs ('19 and '16).

"Performance" is relative, and in all honesty, I honestly believe that a blind taste test will have all but the truly highly skilled and well-attuned drivers here not being able to consistently distinguish between the different trim levels - and certainly not on public roadways at anywhere near resembling safe (forgetting even legal) bounds.

Plain and simple ,the bigger the wheels the gas mileage per gallon will suffer.Along with the other goodies in the Limited/ Touring models gas mileage will differ compared to the Base/Premiums.
^ And this, kr1, is the undeniable truth. Physics is physics, plain and simple.

But at the same time, kr1, you really need to ground your expectations in reality - and that's what all of us are trying to counsel you towards.

You're chasing after ghosts, here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
561 Posts
You're splitting hairs. Talking about less than a 200lbs difference on a 4500lb vehicle. I would imagine the Touring weighs more because of the leather interior, moonroof, and a few other bells and whistles. The mpg difference is likely due to the slightly different wheel/tire combination and the 3.7% weight increase. But once again, splitting hairs. In real world conditions you wouldn't even notice a difference.

If you're really that concerned about it, don't get the sunroof or the larger wheels.
Splitting hairs about acceleration, but not so much on handling. That extra weight up top makes more of a difference than you think. 80-100lbs on very top of car is probably like have 300lbs in the seat. Sure most people don;t care or notice, but there is a difference if you're attuned.
and over the course of the owing a car for several years i'd rather have it handle more like a car than a SUV/crossover. Its a pleasure jumping into a nimble car after lugging a crossover around town and underrated IMO. The Ascent does handle more like a car than any other comparable car i've driven and part of the reason i purchased one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
561 Posts
I'm guessing they don't offer bench seat on the top trims because the extra weight along with everything else would tip it over the edge of having the reduce the MPG rating???
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
575 Posts
I doubt that is the reasoning, my best guess would be ease of packaging and production. I would bet the bench seats in leather upholstery optioned vehicles has a very low take rate. Also another note on the sunroof vs none and handling I do believe you can only get the sunroof with 20" wheels so I would surmise while adding weight you are also removing a lot of tire roll, and the two may even out in terms of feel and feedback to the driver. In any case, take 100 ascents and do instrumented testing on them over a period of fluctuating temperatures, I would be the 0-60 would fluctuate quite a bit on each vehicle but would still average out in the end to approximately the manufacturers claim.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18 Posts
No, I want the sunroof. I want the 18" wheels.

Here's the excerpt from the article:

"In our acceleration testing, the Premium hit 60 mph in 6.9 seconds and ran the quarter mile in 15.5 seconds at 90.9 mph. The Touring, however, posted a 0-60 mph time of 7.3 seconds and a quarter-mile time of 15.8 seconds at 89.2 mph."

If that's repeatable, then that's a big difference. I'm looking for more data.
I’ve owned and driven pretty fast cars 997.2 911 being my last bae before I moved to a boring 535, and now to the Ascent. I, too, was obsessed about performance figures when buying the Ascent because it’s in my DNA. In practice, however, it just won’t matter. Hell, I even started pumping 87 instead of 93 because while it does make a difference performance-wise, I’m just driving a big boring car that I can exactly push much.

If performance means this much to you, I suggest looking at other cars. I like the Ascent fine, however I’m not sure if i’d buy it again given the new cars available now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
73 Posts
I'm considering an Ascent Premium with optional Sunroof. I had an Ascent Premium w/o sunroof as a loaner for 8 days, and it was a great driving car. I had a good chance to drive it in different situation every day, and compare it to my almost 2015 Forster.

I'm concerned about two things that the sunroof might hurt:
1. The mileage
2. The performance
3. The handling (due to the heavier roof).

Can anyone shed any light on this?


Here's my reference research material and data:



1. In this comparison, the premium was faster to 60mph than the Touring. The author attributed this to the weight of the vehicle: https:// www.motortrend.com/cars/subaru/ascent/2019/2019-subaru-ascent-first-test-review

2. Subaru rates the mpg as worse for the low-profile wheels:
subarumedia.iconicweb.com/mediasite/attachments/19MY_Ascent_specs-FINAL.pdf
Fuel economy city/highway/combined (mpg) *manufacturer’s estimated numbers
  • 21/27/23 for 18” wheels
  • 20/26/22 for 20” wheels
3. Subaru notes the weights difference of each of the 4 models, but not the Premium with optional sunroof: https:// www.subaru.com/content/dam/subaru/downloads/pdf/brochures/2020/ascent/S-00833_20ASCb_rX.pdf

  • Ascent: 4,430 lbs.
  • Ascent Premium: 4,451 lbs.
  • Ascent Limited: 4,515 lbs.
  • Ascent Touring: 4,603 lbs.
How much weight does the sunroof add?
What does the Touring have that makes it heavier than the Limited?


Thanks,
KR1
I had a Nissan Altima ‘07 and had a lot of issues with the sunroof and my next vehicle would not have it.
I purchased the Subaru Ascent Premium w/o sunroof- but should have purchased it with sunroof. I had a loaner with a sunroof- very nice.
 
1 - 20 of 28 Posts
Top