Harrier 2017

[therock]

Wow 14 is a lot better than it's competitor, the FXT. I guess for those who don't need the rush, the Harrier will give enough power and over 10 years, the better FC will go a little way towards paying for the price difference too.

Add on the good servicing at Borneo, the fuss free motoring and it doesn't look so expensive after all. 

 

But do others feel that the blind spots are more in the Harrier? 

[Junky73]

seems like those who have collected their rides for the past week experience good FC, 14km/l

 

huh? who said 14km/l?

 

official spec only 13km/l

[Ahyoo2002]

Hi Ahyoo2002,

 

No man, still hoping for getting the COE this Wednesday and had asked to pay SGD2k for guaranteed COE but SE says no need ... seems MI is quite aggressive with 2nd bid 2 week ago at around sgd 49k+ and just missing the final COE premium 50.001k by sgd800+ despite 2nd of the 8 non-guarantee deal ... Btw, I order the FXT just in case you got me wrong due to the long post.

 

Indeed strange on VES surcharge from Jan 2018 for the Harrier Turbo as I had double confirmed with my SE in BM before I requested for the SGD3k deposit to be refunded that Harrier Turbo will NOT have VES surcharge but learned bros looking at details of emission etc. also seems divided.  This is bad news for new Harrier Turbo buyer but will means that MI may then still offer the new Forester 2019 affected by same VES surcharge in totally new platform from Sep to Dec 2018 ... it is now with updated conti-like interior and better looking exterior.

Cheers.

 

Richard

 

Yah, I know you booked a FXT. My understanding is Subaru normally aggressive with the bidding so should be no issue with the COE.

 

For VES surcharge, unless there is a retest, my understanding of CEVS vs VES

1) FXT +$5K -> +20K

2) Harrier T $0 -> +$10K 

3) CX5 2.0L No change. 

[Soya]

huh? who said 14km/l?

 

official spec only 13km/l

Must be the Harrier Flintstones Edition......

[richard_crl032]

seems like those who have collected their rides for the past week experience good FC, 14km/l

 

Hi Datura,

 

Wow .. this reported 14km/l for Harrier Turbo is nice but FC discussion is highly subjective depending on (i) city/hway ratio and (ii) driving style.  Perhaps, all are light footed due to new cars which owners wish to break it.

 

As mentioned earlier, the non turbo PI version is 10+km/l for 70/30 city/hway from personal experience and 14km/l is unbelievably good since qashqai 2.0L NA is doing 10-12km/l nia and harrier turbo is 200kg heavier as well as turbo charged ! Regardless lexus NX-200t engine used, I would expect it to be more like 9-11km/l typical but if indeed 14km/l, it must be worst pick up than how I drove it to have such nice FC for 2.0L turbo against 9/11km/l that I learnt of FXT.

 

Cheers,

 

Richard

Edited August 1, 2017 by richard_crl032

[khinghong]

Must be the Harrier Flintstones Edition......

^o^ lol

[Soya]

Hi Datura,

 

Wow .. this reported 14km/l for Harrier Turbo is nice but FC discussion is highly subjective depending on (i) city/hway ratio and (ii) driving style. Perhaps, all are light footed due to new cars which owners wish to break it.

 

As mentioned earlier, the non turbo PI version is 10+km/l for 70/30 city/hway from personal experience and 14km/l is unbelievable good since qashqai 2.0L NA is doing 10-12km/l nia and harrier turbo is 200kg heavier as well as turbo charged ! Regardless lexus NX-200t engine used, I would expect it to be more like 9-11km/l typical but if indeed 14km/l, it must be worst pick up than how I drove it to have such nice FC for 2.0L turbo against 9/11km/l that I learn of FXT.

 

Cheers,

 

Richard

Cannot be 14km/L. More so during run in period.

 

Maybe somebody read wrongly as the trip computer probably showed 14L/100km

Edited August 1, 2017 by Soya

[Junky73]

Cannot be 14km/L. More so during run in period.

 

Maybe somebody read wrongly as the trip computer probably showed 14L/100km

 

yeah. 14L sounds more credible

[AFWE69]

So far I have yet to own a car that's more fuel efficient than official numbers.

[Aloe111]

14L/100km will be terrible

[Enye]

14L/100km will be terrible

 

yes terrible indeed

 

and to tell you that the FC of a 2 litre turbo SUV would be significantly better than this would be lying to you

 

  

[Soya]

yes terrible indeed

 

and to tell you that the FC of a 2 litre turbo SUV would be significantly better than this would be lying to you

 

14L/100km works out to be around 7km/L.

 

Shld be around there for a 2L petrol SUV that's being run in during stop go city traffic

 

If someone expects to get 14km/L, they bought hope instead of a SUV

Edited August 1, 2017 by Soya

[andrewyewkc]

14L/100km works out to be around 7km/L.

 

Shld be around there for a 2L petrol SUV that's being run in during stop go city traffic

 

If someone expects to get 14km/L, they bought hope instead of a SUV

Haha, hope and miracle.

 

The empirical equation for efficiency are as follows:

e (city) = 13.94km/L - 3.63km/L/ton

e (highway) = 18.77 km/L - 4.63km/L/ton

Although the Harrier should be more efficient than this, it cannot be too far off. Driving style will matter tremendously too.  

[therock]

So this 14km/l is similar to the 0-100 in 7 secs?

Hmm...

[QQ2017]

Must be the Harrier Flintstones Edition......

 

 

Here's the Flinstones Harrier Edition.... hehe... 

[Soya]

Here's the Flinstones Harrier Edition.... hehe...

No turbo badge on the tailgate. How to do 0-100 in 7 secs?

[Theoldjaffa]

No turbo badge on the tailgate. How to do 0-100 in 7 secs?

Can lah. Put Sports mode = 6s

 

#charsayone

Edited August 1, 2017 by Theoldjaffa

[khinghong]

Here's the Flinstones Harrier Edition.... hehe...

This stock tyre size is 1800/R20