These Comparison Knock outs are starting to make me sick. Which SUV has better TRACTION ? Question Left out. Which SUV has better Hill Decent? Question left out. Which SUV has better Resale Value? Etc
Edmunds.com Definitely the Forester, after driving and looking at both with a critical eye. The Forester wins hands down. The Mazda is OK, a bit feminine compared to the ruggdness of the AWD Forester.
Guys, I've been driven different vehicle in my life. I don't have an 4wd vehicle and some red and fwd but in northern CALIFORNIA winter storm are worst than the east coast. I used to live I New York driving winter was easy because the road is flat not like northern California is mountain snow is difficult to drive except if you have a subaru cars nothing to worry. I just bought a subaru forester limited all options. Forester drive like a lexus with an awd.
All you guys will complain about "oh well the subaru has the best awd system ever... blah blah blah". Honestly, the MAZDA has a pretty good one too. We have had it for 2 winters now (including the horrific of winter past) and the car did awesome. We drove it home from baltimore MD to Pittsburgh PA on bald summer tires (literally bald because winters hadn't come in yet) and it made it everywhere. Yes it is not AS GOOD as the symetrical awd offered with subaru but yes it gets the job done quite nicely. And if you compare apples to apples, Naturally aspirated against naturally aspirated, they are both pretty much the same. Do you get Bi-Xenon and auto swivel headlamps in the forester? Do you get blind spot monitors? Do you get rain-sensing wipers? Do you get push button start on all models? Can you get a Manual in the forester? So yes the CX5 has a lot to offer too.
I'm not an off-road fun, and I test drove 10+ suvs: cayenne diesel, bmw x3, glc, gla, xc60, nx300h, rx400h, edge, outback, crv, rogue... I don't feel much difference among them, until I drove forester. Just one thing knocking off every other cars: the unassailable visibility and the smart handling. Driving it is an enjoyment, the first time I feel like driving a car. Never test drove cx5 because it has too small fuel tank, and the screen not easy to touch.
***** well, maybe different people have different feeling, which is very subjective. I feel cayenne a little clumsy when turning. x3 has low acceleration. My last car is 328i convertible, which is supposed to accelerate fast, but it has obvious latency especially in low speed.
I own a 2015 Subaru Forester and I love it...i love the way it looks and drives. The all wheel drive system is 2nd to none....its feels like a gecko lizard in the road. Btw I got the 2.5 non turbo version...
I'm not one to complain, and I don't mind, but there are a couple things they didnt mention. O the Subaru, if you do your research, you find that Subaru actually has some of the very best CVT transmissions on the market. They litterly completely redesigned the their new CVT's. They have the widest range and can even fake gears if your so inclined to shift yourself. And on the Mazda, they don't mention the anything about the AWD, its reported slow and ver basic. Whereas the Subaru is far superior. In that regard, everyone I've heard of that has a new forester says it's quite fun to drive and it handles very well. They also don't mention the drive train layout, the Subaru is symmetrical whereas, the Mazda is not. Now, don't get me wrong, I do like the Mazda (very much actually), but they did leave out some prime selling features and facts.
As a recent owner of Subaru Forester, I considered CX-5, and Ford Escape before buying my Subaru. It's a very honest car to drive, excellent for my height (5'11) to get in without squatting or jumping. Excellent visibility. AWD makes the car feel very firm, and gets 0-60 in decent time. I would have loved it to be a 6 speed transmission but its a 4 speed since its 2011 model. The control panel is cluster free and simple to use unlike Ford's. When the time comes, my 2nd car will also be a Subaru Forester.
Forester hands down! Have a 2015 six speed manual Forester and its superb! Wouldn't trade it for anything.....and the visibility just can't be beat! Windows are enormous and the small side front windows give so much more light and visibility. Its safe beyond belief and fabulous in the snow and rain (even with the crappy stock tires!). This is my 2nd Subie and I'm hooked for life. My hounds love it too!
Test drove both, but bought the Subaru. Reasons - better visibility from the driver's seat, but especially from the rear seats. The CX-5 was claustrophobic in the rear (I'm pretty sure most auto journalists don't sit in the rear while someone else drives); the Subaru has larger windows and feels much bigger. Better leg room in the rear for the Subaru as well. We wanted something that would hold 5 adults comfortably. If I was looking for something sporty, I'd go for a WRX. The Subaru offered a light colour interior. CX-5 black only. Price - once you factor in AWD, the Subaru is much cheaper than the Mazda, especially if you get the 2.5l engine in the CX-5. Including taxes, fees, etc. the AWD CX-5 was Canadian $1,700 more and that was with the base 2.0l engine. Better safety rating for the Subaru, which is a big deal. The problem with most auto journalists is they want everything to be a sports car and take points off accordingly for vehicles that aren't. I drive mostly on urban streets and highways in an area that gets snow occasionally, so I wanted the AWD. I don't really care about sportiness.
FrankeeD CX-5 in black interior only? Last time I looked it had at least 3 different colors that came in either cloth or leather. As for the more powerful engine in the Subu, too bad it's bolted to a CVT.
Both are compelling car but for the Canadian winter, the Subaru Forester would be my choice as it holds much better and does not rust like you dropped it in the ocean.
I brought CX-5 on 2014 before this video. I only did test driving on Forester and CX-5 when I brought the car. On my opinion, if you are looking for a SUV for your family (kids), buy a Forester. If you are single or have no kids and only care about driving seat, buy a CX-5.
I'm with you as a regular every day driver you can't go wrong with the cx5 . It's athletic , nimble and a looker in soul red metallic with limo tints . The black on black wheels coming soon
my knee jerk reaction was how did Mike and the CX-5 not sweep that matchup. But if you think about the utility in SUV you realize the Forester is the better option. Although I'd still buy the Mazda before I bought the Subaru
Richard Joash Tan haha you’re bullshit. Anyone who buys a Subaru or CVT doesn’t know what they’re doing. Water pumps religiously go out on those pieces of trash even before 100k. Look it up
Corbin shea good point. but Ive must have seen at least only 2 of the base models driving on the roads. they are the most ugly things out there. without the spoiler on the back, or the wheels being more stylish
Don't agree with you at all. We got the XT and it is a hoot to drive. Instant turbo response with a sporty ride. Nothing drab about exterior either. Agressive looking front end with cool looking wheels. Additionally, the CVT is great, atleast in the XT. Has responsive paddle shifters and modes that simulate 6-speed and 8-speed automatics perfectly. The XT comes standard with best ground clearance, very capable AWD w/ X-mode, sunroof, superior visibility, most powerful engine in the class, and best crash safety. We got ours for 28K and it felt like a steal for all those features. A similarly equiped Ford escape would cost in the high 30K range and wouldn't be nearly as capable off road. The Mazda is nice but it is way underpowered and not really an offroad machine. Don't like the styling that much either.
I totally agree with G8GTJav. I am in the market for an SUV and plan to buy in less than a year. I tested about 5 of them around the same price range and none can touch the Subaru Forester 2.0L XT. It is at the top of the list and will be my first Subaru. 2nd is the Mazda CX5 GT then the Toyota Rav 4. I own a Honda sedan but the CR V fell short on power, and it has no hand brakes which is extremely handy for controlling the vehicle when in a slide - on icy roads. I've used it many times, and a foot pedal emergency brake is not for me. 8.7 inches of ground clearance is what you need for deep snow too and light off roading if you want to have some fun.
dleetrini I agree both of you, that's why I got myself the XT, in the small suv class, I can't find another car that has both great AWD in the snow and the nice power on the road
***** Yeah I'm aware, my brother has an STI and the suspension is much better than the XT. The XT suspension absorbs every single bump into the cabin and rattles the interior.
polaris911 Interesting. Is your dad also disappointed with the ride? Do you have really bad roads in your area? The ride is definitely a bit firm and sport-tuned but I don't find it rough or harsh in any way. Subaru engineers did a great job on the suspension tuning, in my opinion. Heck, they even tested/tuned the XT at the Nurburgring! After 16,000+ miles, our XT still feels tight and rattle-free like when it was new. Its been a great vehicle. Maybe your dad would have been happier with a standard Forester as it is geared towards a softer ride. One last thing, the Forester is built off the same Impreza chassis as WRX so it has very similar suspension with parts interchangeability. The STI is tuned for an even more sporty ride so it is interesting that you don't find that ride harsh compared to the FXT.
i drove both 2015 top models while looking for a new vehicle to handle the terrain and weather here in colorado. it was a hands down win for the CX-5 on almost every level. i don't believe their 0-60 claim for the forester one second. it seemed slow mostly be cause you feel disconnected from the road. the forester sways like a boat and inspires zero confidence in the corners. i live at the end of a 2.4 mile dirt road in the rockies with a 1200 foot elevation gain. i've gone up it many times with 3-6 inches of snow in the mazda (with winter tires) and it's phenomenal. its nice to drive in the canyons and it really shines on the dirt. i would think the "offroad" win here goes to the mazda because of the way it handles bumps and slides. granted, i never took the forester off road, but i wouldn't feel confident doing anything but putting around slowly on a dirt road with its huge roll problem. the ground clearance is slightly higher in the forester, but really isn't a big enough difference for 99.9% of users to even notice. i only have 3 complaints about the mazda cx-5. 1. it needs a bigger sunroof, though its not small, just jealous of sunroof's you see on the new jeep cherokees. 2. more power, the fuel economy is nice, but a low boost, quick spool turbo would be nice for another 50 hp. 3. tomtom (or as the wife and i call it - dumbdumb). its 2016 (2015 when we bought it) why isn't there google maps??! the tomtom sat nav is so clunky, it locks you out when you're moving. the voice command sucks so bad i'll actually pull over to get directions. it doesn't seem to notice which direction you're heading, when you search for gas stations its libel only to show you ones you've already passed. and it doesn't map your results, just a list with distance. its so archaic! makes me frustrated just thinking about it! anywho, back to the mazda. it looks amazing (for an suv). i've had more than a few people ask me about what it was when we got it. less so nowadays as they seem to be getting very popular in the mountains. i'd also like to point out the mazda design (inside and out) has a consistent theme to it, it looks like they cared about placement and flow which makes for a much nicer driving experience. the forester we test drove looked like every linear foot was designed by a different team and was just hodgepodged together. i seriously think they need to hire some new designers. zoom zoom!
Subaru Forrester because it has the best all-wheel-drive system and its standard that's a fact just search for Subaru Forrester all-wheel-drive. Next reason Subaru has the best pre collision breaking right now. And the last reason it has the best crash test ratings it was the only SUV to get a good rating for 2014 in the small overlap test.
I presumably you guys didn't try the CVT on the Subaru Forester. Its not just like the typical CVT on a Honda. It mimics like how a traditional Automatic gearbox with 8 speed gear change on Sports mode.
I had a forester xt. It was pretty fun to drive and surprisingly quick. Tint the windows and slap some dark rims on it and it looks pretty dope. But I bought it cuz I live in tahoe and no other car shreds snow like a subie. Subie all day long for me but I do have to agree the Mazda is pretty sharp looking.
Why not use an AWD CX-5 to represent a comparison consumers would actually make. The Forester would have stomped an AWD CX-5 handily. An AWD Touring CX-5 cost about two grand more than a Premium Forester, gets two fewer highway mpg, has 3.1 cubic feet less cargo capacity, 43.7 cubic feet less interior volume, weighs 166 pounds more, has 50 less miles of range between fill ups, and cost eight cents more a mile to own for five years (so a grand more a year) when compared to the Forester, all information taken from your own website. With stats like that who would buy the Mazda instead of the Subie? People that like to piss away a grand more a year for less utility?
Noah E This is a good point. I looked at Edmunds cost of ownership calculator, and it was about 5k difference in favor of the Subaru. However, most of this was due to depreciation, not fuel economy. They are about the same with that. Subarus seem to have better resale value.
Love my Mazda CX 5, had the Subaru Impreza . 100km/7Ltr vs 100km/8Ltr premium. Service is also a lot cheaper, I like a car from A-B and don't try to win the Monte Carlo Rally.
I'm going to be buying a subaru soon, I've owned 3 mazdas in the past. Subaru is much more dependable then mazda. I'm looking at interior space , mpgs, and dependability. I looked at the cx5's and I'm 6'2' I felt scrunched up in there. And all mazdas look the same these days. I'm definitely buying subaru, they last for years and years.
Depends what you want, how big you are and what your interests are. Test drove all these SUV type vehicles in the UK 18 months ago. At 6'4'' wanted a car that would be good for business use, practical for outdoor use, towing caravans and carrying dogs/golf clubs. Mazda CX5 was too small for me, didn't seem to hold the road so well and failed miserably with the golf clubs. Had the manual diesel XC for 15 months and can't complain. Love driving it. Just wish we got our cars in the UK at the prices the US pay!!!!!
I am in the market for this range Crossover SUV and have been going back and forth between several models. Only one's left for consideration are CX-5, Forester, and VW Tiguan. Driving is fun with Tiguan and CX-5. The vibility of Forester is too good to pass as family siting in the back seats won't get car sick and it will be a joy ride for them. Tiguan visibility is also very good and the panoramic Sunroof makes Tiguan ride feel so pleasant while second row feels little tight. If you are fully loading these vehicles they could be getting into the territory of Base model Volvo XC60 which has some great promos to make it appealing.
This review is pretty bad. Don't forget the Forester 2.5L has OIL CONSUMPTION issue. See owner forums. While I agree with the conclusion, the scoring was mostly superficial and flawed. For example, giving a point to the Forester because a Turbo engine exists, where as all other handling attributes favor the CX-5 is wrong.
oil consumption issue was addressed with redesigned piston rings in late 2013. the oil consumption issued has been addressed a while ago, it's just getting a lot of noise recently due to the class action suit. the class action suit stems from the fact that subaru did not address the problem early on. subaru has taken full responsibility of the problem and is swapping out the short blocks of any affected engine starting in 2011 until early 2014 models that have the problem. the Subaru Forester is a better engineered vehicle than anything else out there, period. it makes the 4WD system on other cross-overs look like toys. people have never purchased Subarus for their looks, they bought them for their utility, their safety, and their value. i would take a base model Subaru Forester 2.5i any day over a CR-V EX-L
jgg204 Well, according to real owners there are some 2014s which consume oil too. In addition, some folks with 2012 vehicles had their shortblock replaced with a new one, and they still consume oil.... The question is if you believe the issue was addressed *completely*, not just mitigation / partial solution, like by overfilling FB engines with oil (what Subaru has been doing for a while). It looks like 2015 will be the year we will find out for sure. Until then, I would not buy a Subaru with an FB engine.
The reason why the class action suit came about was due to the fiasco in the early years. You are right, dealerships were overfilling by a quart and pretending nothing was wrong, short block replacements were still resulting in oil consumption, Subaru corporate had nothing to say about the issue nor any real plan or solution in place to fix the problem. People got fed up and the class action suit was formed. However keep the following things in mind: - The short block was never the problem, it was the piston rings. It was cheaper for Subaru and less labor intensive for the dealers to just have an entire short block assembly sent to them and swapped out vs having a Subaru Master Tech re-assemble everything back together and worry about clearances at each step. Early on Subaru did not know what the problem was so they were swapping out short block assemblies with fresh short block assemblies off the production line that still had the original piston ring design. - Subaru more than any other car manufacture has their model years ahead of the actual calendar year. The prime example of this is the Subaru Forester where in Feb 2014, the 2014 model transitioned to the 2015 model. Going in reverse, the 2014 model actually covered most of the 2013 calendar year. Since the piston rings were redesigned in 2013, it means that some 2014 models received the new piston rings at the factory and others did not. As of the writing of this right now, there have not been any 2015 model year vehicles with the oil consumption issue. If you want to verify that, go to subaruforester.org and subaruoutback.org, also check out car complaints, do whatever you need to do. I have a 2015 Subaru Forester that does not burn any oil which is a relief to me, coming from a 12 yr old Civic that burned 1 qt a month. So I know when there is oil consumption and the mid-late 2014s, and 2015s do not have it Now with all of that said, it does not make it right how Subaru handled things early on. A lot of customers were screwed over, many got so fed up they traded in the vehicle and lost thousands on the trade in, many customers have wasted countless hour at the dealership waiting for their vehicles to be "fixed" only to then have the same issue. I get that, I would be frustrated as well and I would be right in on that class action suit with everyone else. However, to come onto youtube video sites and prob others and blast paranoia nonsense that is irrelevant now, is misguided to say the least. Do you go onto every youtube review of a 2014/2015 Toyota vehicle and bring up the acceleration issue?
jgg204 Why irrelevant? It is relevant until proven otherwise. Which is exactly my point that I do not trust Subaru has fixed the problem completely until it has been verified. Verification takes time, but until then people would be smart to stay away.
why would you give the Mazda a point for cargo when it can fit a dog and holds more cargo? Biased a little or trying to keep it close? Also, the Mazda is a real off-road capable small SUV. Which would I prefer to talk off road or in the snow..? The Subaru. Mazda does look better, so I give it points for that... but it's slower and less practical. Thumbs down on this review for it's biased, subjective, and overall sell out review.
I want to wait for the 2019 Forester with the new platform and then I will test drive both of these vehicles comparing 2019 each. Right now I'm leaning toward the Subaru. Never owned either brand.
Only have refilled my new 2016 CX-5 Touring once, so take that with a grain of salt. Did lots of research prior to buying this car..Wife, even made an excel spreadsheet to compare Outback, Rav 4 and CX-5. There is little to no road noise.. Plus most of us listen to music anyways.. Wish it had a little more cargo room, and memory seats, but I can't complain for the price, technology package included. Love the power, where power is needed, smooth ride and look. FYI, free navigation updates for 3 years. Bose stereo sounds incredible and now don't mind being stuck in traffic! Test drive one, you won't be disappointed. One more thing, read and watch all the popular review forums, sites, youtube. They are not being paid to praise how well Mazda has done on their 2016 CX-5.
I chose the Forester and really like it. However, the single point that I am not terribly keen on is the dual screen infotainment system. The system on the outback is far superior. I can make an analogy, the Forester infotainment system is like working with a computer with DOS while the Outback is like Windows...
We have a 13 CX5 GT AWD and absolutely love it. So much nicer than the forester and so much better looking as well. We have the sky blue paint which you don't see on any other SUV... Unlike all the bland ugly colors offered on the subie.... Subaru makes a nice car but you get more bang for your buck with the MAZDA..
Yup! I bought a 2013 outback 3.6 because it was the last year you could get the 5eat. I think subaru is making an enormous mistake not offering a manual in all models. The kind of people who buy subarus are predominately people who prefer a stick.
Forester IMO but the CX5 is close behind. And the only one I would get is an XT. Not sure how the CX5 is considered more fun to drive when you can have a 250hp turbo in the Subie. Im also a little confused at how one of the top considerations for buyers today is SAFETY and yet that wasn't even a category. The Subaru is a top safety pick + and got the best rating in the tough small overlap IIHS crash a couple years ago.
I test drove each of these cars before deciding on the Forester. The CX5 has a nicer interior that holds you in place. The way they designed the cars visibility is a major flaw, forcing you to rely on their side collision warning system. The forester is massively better on visibility. It's always funny to see each reviewer complain about the aesthetics of the car, when that's what makes it great while driving. Their CVT system is great, and not too noisy when I kick my XT into sport mode and zip onto the freeway. On that note the standard 2.5 has 174hp vs. the CX5's fastest 2.0 at 184hp (that's a small difference) the XT is 250hp, again, that is not a small difference! This review is garbage in my opinion because they're giving it to the CX5 basically because of looks. Buying an SUV even a sport versions purpose is to do more than a Sudan or hatch back, not ge super cool to look at. Consumer reports gave it to the forester as best sport SUV.
The Subaru latest advancements in lineartronics CVT is probably much better than Mazda dated automatic transmission which is not as fast to response. This CVT is also used in the auto variant of the WRX which demonstrates its robustness and responsiveness to handle high torque and horsepower engines. The CVT still throws your back to the seat in the XT model when you really want immediate burst of acceleration. CVT works well with competent engines as it helps to improve acceleration timings without requiring the driver to understand the engine charteristics well and have good hand muscles to handle a manual shifter. Subaru boxer engines have good torque characteristics which suits a CVT. On the other hand, a weak engine like the one in the Mitsubishi outlander 2.4 mated to a CVT gives you the underpowered and rubber band effects, especially on a heavy SUV.
+SK L Who are you trying to convince? You or us? Seems like you are justifying your purchase instead of enjoying it. CVTs are constantly receiving terrible reviews, because, well, they suck. Good fuel economy, but they suck. Just because a trans is traditional auto, doesn't mean its dated. Like I said before, who are you trying to convince?
+J C I am trying to bring my point to folks whom have not really tried out those modern CVTs implementations before shouting that they sucks. It is easy to form opinions simply based on past negative reviews around older CVTs in general. There are good traditional auto and bad CVTs and vice versa. The best case is to test drive the car and feel for yourself how the car and engine works with the transmission. I wouldn't really says a 6speed auto is dated but the advantages of having more gears ratio works well for fuel consumption and linearity of progression. On the fuel efficiency part which Mazda has its own forte in increasing engine compression to improve it. Car should be reviewed as a system working together., not on individual components.
I am thinking of purchasing a Forester and watched this video out of curiosity. I took it for a test drive and thought the subaru was fantastic. It handled well, wasn't over the top noisy, had the bells and whistles that I wanted, plus subaru's are supposed to be very reliable. I owned a Mazda 626 and it was a horrible car, I started having problems at 10,000 miles and finally ended up getting rid of it. So that puts me off to Mazda, of course i could have just gotten a lemon.
I'm a subaru fan, but have to give credit where credit is do and the mazda is actually really good AWD, and actually outshines the subaru on initial takeoff. I'd still pick the subie thou
CX-5 (for me) and it's not even close. The CX-5 is lighter and based on the Mazda3 platform which are two of the many reasons it's so much fun to drive. It has a free-revving engine and is offered with a brilliant manual transmission. It gets great gas mileage and it looks amazing in any color. The CX-5 interior is very straightforward and ergonomic so I have no idea what they're talking about in this video unless they're referring to the infotainment system. The Subbie has more power but also weighs considerably more, auto comes as a gross CVT, is no fun to drive, and it looks positively depressing. About the only practical reasons for preferring the Forester would be better rear window visibility and better off-road capability. Basically If you want a CUV that is a "driver's car", go with the CX-5. If you want to go off road sometimes, go with the Forester.
I have already eliminated the Forester from my list. You mentioned its bland styling and lack of driving personality. But there is also its universally panned infotainment system. The reviews I've read say that system is confusing and difficult to use.
Everyone NEEDS to check the 2015 Vehicle Quality Study by JD Power. Hyundai and KIA now make the highest quality and most reliable vehicles in the auto industry. I highly recommend that people buy the 2016 Hyundai Tucson and 2016 KIA Sportage. Mazda, Fiat and Subaru were ranked at the bottom and had poor quality and poor reliability. Times have changed.
Marcus Jensen Korea is the most technologically advanced country in the world. It's no surprise they also make the highest quality vehicles. German cars still make the best driver's cars though. Japanese cars have fallen behind.
Marcus Jensen Hyundai is the largest contract defence manufacturer in the world, manufacturing the world's most technologically advanced army tank, the K2 Black Panther. Hyundai makes the best SUV's in the industry, period.
Marcus Jensen I am from JAPAN and here is my opinion: 1. Korean cars (Hyundai and KIA) are very high quality. 2. Mazda is known to be "poor man's car" in Japan. 3. Rich Japanese people prefer to buy German cars.
the mazda's design is hot,the front and the back is nice.what i don't like about other cars is that it's only hot at the front part like the toyota vios 2015
my brother's 2013 mazda is falling apart due to rust here in Montreal, as every other mazda I know. I have a 1994 subaru SVX running like new as a daily commuter. Zero problems, But my wife's 2014 Subaru Forester XT suffers of "brake fade". Even it's equipped with Eyesight, I hit the car in front of me in a regular family summer day driving in the highway, with a stop and go traffic... and Subaru still does not explain me what is wrong with my brakes...
I watch the Edmunds, KBB and CR reviews to get an overall sense of a vehicle, specially it's reliability. However, no mention here of the very serious oil consumption flaws of the Forester. Only going over the superficial values of a vehicle is good up to a point, but IMHO, the longevity of any vehicle is a true measure of it's overall quality. www.torquenews.com/1084/2nd-new-oil-consumption-lawsuit-suddenly-filed-against-subaru
Aesthetics and a more sporty ride = CX5 Outward visibility and utility = Forester I think the CX5 is a much nicer looking car, but the Forester is MUCH nicer to look out of. The Forester also better exemplifies the "utility" of an SUV.
The bachelor in me would rather get the Mazda purely for the 'personality' factor, but since I am now in fact a family man, sounds like Forester is the smarter choice for Canadian winters with AWD, and space for carseats/strollers.
And you didn't even mentioned about the AWD capability for both these 2 vehicle. These are the crossover vehicles, but you are making a comparison like the super car challenging each other on the highway? Nuts!
its too slow in my opinion, regardless of the fuel savings. when i downshift by flooring my automatic cx-5 it is near instant. these eco-CVT's are still fairly slow. a shame cause CVT will ultimately be the way to go. the only subaru's that matter anymore are the WRX (non-sti) and maybe the BRZ (though it needs some muscle and AWD).
My test drive of a fully loaded '17 Forester XT Limited left me feeling that the power was adequate but not impressive. The CVT is good but could use some reprogramming. The visibility inside is by far the best in the market. The handling is great, predictable and confidence inspiring, but far from enjoyable.
Both aren't that good. The best SUV in this segment is going to be the 2016 Hyundai Tucson. Just look it up guys. Superb modern design coupled with new improved handling from Hyundai. Hyundai's 2015 vehicles all have superb handling, a huge change from previous years.
Shirazi Hyundai cars also have superior power-to-weight ratios than all Japanese cars in the same segment. Just compare the 2015 Hyundai Sonata with the 2015 Honda Accord. At the same RPMs, the 2015 Sonata has 2X more torque output compared to the 2015 Accord. The Japanese auto makers have fallen way behind.
I love the look of the cx-5 compared to other CUV's, but i would not buy a CUV unless it has AWD and a turbo charged engine. How about Mazda throws an old mazdaSpeed3 engine in one of these?
I have a CX5 2.2 diesel sport nav AWD 6 speed automatic and it's a brilliant car. There's some good TH-cam videos of the CX5's off road performance and it's impressive.
OK. So I'll ask the question. Why are they not comparing these as crossovers? The purpose of purchasing a crossover is to obtain the functionality of a mix of car-like and SUV like features/qualities. Otherwise, just buy a darned regular car. Agree with many others here. The areas of comparison had NOTHING to do with looking at the vehicles from those perspectives. IMHO (and it's just that). You wanna know what people who use crossovers for their actual functionality drive? Go to Alaska or western Canada in the Rockies. See if you can count 1 - CX5 for every 10 - Foresters you see in Fairbanks or Anchorage Alaska. There is a reason we used to joke that Subaru is the State car of Alaska. They have the utility, features, reliability and durability that others in the segment simply don't.
These are both fantastic cars. They didn't talk about reliability. They both have excellent reliability track records but hands down a naturally aspirated motor will be more reliable than the turbo time bomb under the hood of that Subaru. I love my 2002 2.5 NA forester but I'm eyeballing the CX-7 to replace it. I would assume over time, the Subaru would be a more expensive upkeep. More so if you stick with two wheel drive on the CX-7.
Cars rust. They are all prone to rusting. Most people don't drive a car long enough for them to rust these days anyways. My first Subaru was a loyale that was so ridiculously rusty it was more replacement metal and bondo then original body when I was done with it. My Forester has several visible rust spots. My two MX-5s (one the same age as the forester) were 100% rust free but I didn't drive them in salt. Don't forget foresters were notorious for rusting out the lift gate at the wiper. I'm not pedling one over the other mind you, just that all cars rust :).
FrankTheRabbit The CX-5 has plastic cladding along the underbody and wheel wells - where all the weather sprays up when you drive, so it should be much safer from rust than other mazdas.
I have had very bad luck with the 2013 -2015 subarus. 2013 wrx 3 transmitions withing 40,000 miles. 2014 subaru legacy was the worst by far, awd failure ,anti lock break failure , steering failure, traction control actually caused me to get into an accident. Let me explain while going down a steep hill on a right hand turn my passenger side tires hit a patch of snow and locked up , sending the rotational force to the driver side , causing the car to violent turn hard to the right and pushed me off the road and caused an accident. Also the car will hesitate when pulling out from a stop , is very bad if the car is on a slight bit of gravel the car will stop in the middle of the street and then after a second re engage the power, not to mention the stalling and countless other problems . Have been to the dealer multiple times and they have said the car is functioning as intended , even contacted subaru corporate , had the same experience . If you decide to look at a subaru during the test drive ask to test the awd system if they say no or have no way for you to test it leave and do not trust them.
I really want to like the Forester but it's just so damn plain looking! If the Forester looked like the CX-5 I would buy one tomorrow! Especially with a turbo!
Style wise, CX5 is much better...performance wise, forester XT is more powerful than CX5.I personally will choose forester over CX5 because of practicality, powerful, plus power liftgate which CX5 doesn't even offer it as an option!
Can I get a Forester with Mazda Look and Feel. I like the torque in Mazda but the XT option is off the table in 2019. I am deciding soon, and I think Forester come with a deep design change (who cares if they copy Mazda or Lexus or Porsche, I need one),.. Hope Subaru pays attention to looks and performances. The aspirated engines lack guts, boring looks, and struggles to ramp up on hilly ramps. Subaru is so painful, but a great car
II'm all about the forester but using they didn't use the awed version because they were comparing base models the xt has he much better interior so I'm sure it would have won
I'm confused how Mazda won the interior category... he went on to talk about daily usable cargo space which was less than the Subaru yet it won the category with no real explanation. Also, while most other reputable automotive journalists give high praise to the cvt in the Subaru, you guys call it not very good. Again, with no real explanation. It isn't a conventional cvt like Nissan uses, it has preset gears. For all interested, there is a video on TH-cam that puts car enthusiasts in the Forester and they were unable to tell it was even a cvt (it was set into sport mode on the xt). I really like the Mazda, it is much better looking, I am certain it handles sportier, and it's cheaper, it would have been easy to praise it for valid reasons and critique the Subaru for valid reasons, like road and wind noise at highway speed. Just my 2 cents.
if only the Mazda had more power, i have to say that turbocharged engine in the Subaru just stole the cake.the mazda is more stylish in and out, better to drive, interior quality way better than the Subaru but, 2 sec difference in 0-60 is alot and for an SUV which will be filled with passengers and cargo power is a bless =)
I do admit this latest version of the subaru is worse looking than the previous one which still is a very good looking car. So not sure what subaru were thinking with the styling. But i want a car that goes in all weather not just something that looks good and gets you about.
***** The 2.5 CX-5 is actually the quickest NA in the class. If you are looking for something that does sub-7 sec 0-60, a compact CUV is the last place to look for "power"...
The CX5 has a nice sporty look, but for me personally I like a larger SUV and the Forester would fit that bill. Although I will agree that the interior is drab, with that said i would still pick the Forester but only the 2016 model.
....and the winner is......Honda CR-V. LOL. This is a very tough competitive segment and it boils down to style preference. Forester, CX-5, CR-V, Rogue, Escape, are all competent small SUV/Crossvers. I'd go with the Honda CR-V after driving all of them the last couple of weeks as we narrow down our selection. The Honda just seems to edge them all for me in ride, design, fit and finish ad overall feel in class. Honda's CVT is better than Subaru hands down in my personal experience. It's very smooth. Now, that Forester is a lot of fun to drive though talking about the one with the true zoom, zoom. Thumbs up!
No way when it come to off roading the cx-5 will bow down to the forester and that's for sure. Oh I forgot to mention the forester also perform very well on road as well. I'm side with the forester.
One thing they didn't mention was road noise. The Mazda has a lot more road noise than the Subaru. The Forester also comes in 8 trim levels, the Mazda only offers 3. When the Mazda Kodo design came out on the 2014 Mazda 6 it was a head turner. At least until every other model Mazda makes adopted it. Now all Mazdas seem to look alike. The Mazda 3 looks like a small 6. The CX5 looks like a small CX7, etc...
There will also be loyal Subie fans. I almost was one until friends how owned turbo powered Subies in the past said stay away, as they had various issues.
Subi! I love my Forester! You don't think much about the AWD until the weather turns bad then you are sooooo glad it's got your back!
Own a Forester.. love it..
This review has all the brainpower of a hamster fart.
+Honest Skeptic ..you're being a little too kind here.
lol
Honest Skeptic haha!!
These Comparison Knock outs are starting to make me sick. Which SUV has better TRACTION ? Question Left out. Which SUV has better Hill Decent? Question left out. Which SUV has better Resale Value? Etc
Don't be stupid gene, if they asked those questions they wouldn't be able to fiddle it for the Mazda to win....
VIDEO: Subaru Forester vs Mazda USA CX-5
Which crossover would you buy?
Chevrolet Corvette or the Isuzu Mu-X
only subaru..................
CX-5!
Edmunds.com Definitely the Forester, after driving and looking at both with a critical eye. The Forester wins hands down. The Mazda is OK, a bit feminine compared to the ruggdness of the AWD Forester.
Lionel S. Balasuriya the 2016 cx5 is improved
Thought about CX-5 before Subaru was even on my radar. Now I can't think of any car I'd buy over and over. Subaru for the win.
Guys, I've been driven different vehicle in my life. I don't have an 4wd vehicle and some red and fwd but in northern CALIFORNIA winter storm are worst than the east coast. I used to live I New York driving winter was easy because the road is flat not like northern California is mountain snow is difficult to drive except if you have a subaru cars nothing to worry. I just bought a subaru forester limited all options. Forester drive like a lexus with an awd.
All you guys will complain about "oh well the subaru has the best awd system ever... blah blah blah". Honestly, the MAZDA has a pretty good one too. We have had it for 2 winters now (including the horrific of winter past) and the car did awesome. We drove it home from baltimore MD to Pittsburgh PA on bald summer tires (literally bald because winters hadn't come in yet) and it made it everywhere. Yes it is not AS GOOD as the symetrical awd offered with subaru but yes it gets the job done quite nicely.
And if you compare apples to apples, Naturally aspirated against naturally aspirated, they are both pretty much the same. Do you get Bi-Xenon and auto swivel headlamps in the forester? Do you get blind spot monitors? Do you get rain-sensing wipers? Do you get push button start on all models? Can you get a Manual in the forester?
So yes the CX5 has a lot to offer too.
I'm not an off-road fun, and I test drove 10+ suvs: cayenne diesel, bmw x3, glc, gla, xc60, nx300h, rx400h, edge, outback, crv, rogue... I don't feel much difference among them, until I drove forester. Just one thing knocking off every other cars: the unassailable visibility and the smart handling. Driving it is an enjoyment, the first time I feel like driving a car.
Never test drove cx5 because it has too small fuel tank, and the screen not easy to touch.
You bought that thing over a Cayenne Diesel?! X3?!
Forester has smarter handling? Maybe easier to drive is what you meant..like a Civic to a Corvette!
***** well, maybe different people have different feeling, which is very subjective. I feel cayenne a little clumsy when turning. x3 has low acceleration. My last car is 328i convertible, which is supposed to accelerate fast, but it has obvious latency especially in low speed.
I thought the Outback is the also one of the best especially for station wagon class
I own a 2015 Subaru Forester and I love it...i love the way it looks and drives. The all wheel drive system is 2nd to none....its feels like a gecko lizard in the road. Btw I got the 2.5 non turbo version...
Forester looks like an 06 Toyota while the Mazda looks much more modern and has the slick aggressive look to it. CX 5 All the way.
I'm not one to complain, and I don't mind, but there are a couple things they didnt mention. O the Subaru, if you do your research, you find that Subaru actually has some of the very best CVT transmissions on the market. They litterly completely redesigned the their new CVT's. They have the widest range and can even fake gears if your so inclined to shift yourself. And on the Mazda, they don't mention the anything about the AWD, its reported slow and ver basic. Whereas the Subaru is far superior. In that regard, everyone I've heard of that has a new forester says it's quite fun to drive and it handles very well. They also don't mention the drive train layout, the Subaru is symmetrical whereas, the Mazda is not. Now, don't get me wrong, I do like the Mazda (very much actually), but they did leave out some prime selling features and facts.
As a recent owner of Subaru Forester, I considered CX-5, and Ford Escape before buying my Subaru. It's a very honest car to drive, excellent for my height (5'11) to get in without squatting or jumping. Excellent visibility. AWD makes the car feel very firm, and gets 0-60 in decent time. I would have loved it to be a 6 speed transmission but its a 4 speed since its 2011 model. The control panel is cluster free and simple to use unlike Ford's. When the time comes, my 2nd car will also be a Subaru Forester.
Forester hands down! Have a 2015 six speed manual Forester and its superb! Wouldn't trade it for anything.....and the visibility just can't be beat! Windows are enormous and the small side front windows give so much more light and visibility. Its safe beyond belief and fabulous in the snow and rain (even with the crappy stock tires!). This is my 2nd Subie and I'm hooked for life. My hounds love it too!
Test drove both, but bought the Subaru. Reasons - better visibility from the driver's seat, but especially from the rear seats. The CX-5 was claustrophobic in the rear (I'm pretty sure most auto journalists don't sit in the rear while someone else drives); the Subaru has larger windows and feels much bigger. Better leg room in the rear for the Subaru as well. We wanted something that would hold 5 adults comfortably. If I was looking for something sporty, I'd go for a WRX. The Subaru offered a light colour interior. CX-5 black only. Price - once you factor in AWD, the Subaru is much cheaper than the Mazda, especially if you get the 2.5l engine in the CX-5. Including taxes, fees, etc. the AWD CX-5 was Canadian $1,700 more and that was with the base 2.0l engine. Better safety rating for the Subaru, which is a big deal.
The problem with most auto journalists is they want everything to be a sports car and take points off accordingly for vehicles that aren't. I drive mostly on urban streets and highways in an area that gets snow occasionally, so I wanted the AWD. I don't really care about sportiness.
Hopefully it wont burn oil...their 2.5 motor has issues. Google it.
buildmorefarms100 Ys and Subaru wont honor the warranty if you complain about it. It seems they call it "normal" Why "hope"/////? buy a Chev. Malibu.
Ray Hansen The 2 frineds of mine who owned Subarus both had a lot of problems.
FrankeeD ROGUE=bigger ....if you dont mind a CVT.
FrankeeD CX-5 in black interior only? Last time I looked it had at least 3 different colors that came in either cloth or leather. As for the more powerful engine in the Subu, too bad it's bolted to a CVT.
Both are compelling car but for the Canadian winter, the Subaru Forester would be my choice as it holds much better and does not rust like you dropped it in the ocean.
I brought CX-5 on 2014 before this video. I only did test driving on Forester and CX-5 when I brought the car.
On my opinion, if you are looking for a SUV for your family (kids), buy a Forester. If you are single or have no kids and only care about driving seat, buy a CX-5.
The Forester's CVT isn't good? You guys are nuts?
Everyone has their own opinion. Test drive them and pick what you like. I've been a Mazda guy for 10 years and I love my Mazda.
I'm with you as a regular every day driver you can't go wrong with the cx5 . It's athletic , nimble and a looker in soul red metallic with limo tints . The black on black wheels coming soon
I have a brand new forester xt. Plenty of space, a very nice engine, nice visibility. Mazda cx-5 doesn't have it. Driving is just a pure fun...
Yes would buy CX5 soon waiting for the 2016 to come out!
Total miles on your 2014? What wt. oil do you use???
my knee jerk reaction was how did Mike and the CX-5 not sweep that matchup. But if you think about the utility in SUV you realize the Forester is the better option. Although I'd still buy the Mazda before I bought the Subaru
And you are a bullshit because I will buy the Subaru and the vette before the mazda.
Richard Joash Tan haha you’re bullshit. Anyone who buys a Subaru or CVT doesn’t know what they’re doing. Water pumps religiously go out on those pieces of trash even before 100k. Look it up
Why the hell did they showcase the base model forester and not the touring? Forester would have won 100% if they used he touring/XT
to be similar in price
Corbin shea good point. but Ive must have seen at least only 2 of the base models driving on the roads. they are the most ugly things out there. without the spoiler on the back, or the wheels being more stylish
Don't agree with you at all. We got the XT and it is a hoot to drive. Instant turbo response with a sporty ride. Nothing drab about exterior either. Agressive looking front end with cool looking wheels. Additionally, the CVT is great, atleast in the XT. Has responsive paddle shifters and modes that simulate 6-speed and 8-speed automatics perfectly. The XT comes standard with best ground clearance, very capable AWD w/ X-mode, sunroof, superior visibility, most powerful engine in the class, and best crash safety. We got ours for 28K and it felt like a steal for all those features. A similarly equiped Ford escape would cost in the high 30K range and wouldn't be nearly as capable off road. The Mazda is nice but it is way underpowered and not really an offroad machine. Don't like the styling that much either.
I totally agree with G8GTJav. I am in the market for an SUV and plan to buy in less than a year. I tested about 5 of them around the same price range and none can touch the Subaru Forester 2.0L XT. It is at the top of the list and will be my first Subaru. 2nd is the Mazda CX5 GT then the Toyota Rav 4. I own a Honda sedan but the CR V fell short on power, and it has no hand brakes which is extremely handy for controlling the vehicle when in a slide - on icy roads. I've used it many times, and a foot pedal emergency brake is not for me. 8.7 inches of ground clearance is what you need for deep snow too and light off roading if you want to have some fun.
dleetrini I agree both of you, that's why I got myself the XT, in the small suv class, I can't find another car that has both great AWD in the snow and the nice power on the road
My dad got a brand new XT and I couldn't believe how rough the suspension is.. not a smooth ride at all, especially for an SUV.
***** Yeah I'm aware, my brother has an STI and the suspension is much better than the XT. The XT suspension absorbs every single bump into the cabin and rattles the interior.
polaris911 Interesting. Is your dad also disappointed with the ride? Do you have really bad roads in your area? The ride is definitely a bit firm and sport-tuned but I don't find it rough or harsh in any way. Subaru engineers did a great job on the suspension tuning, in my opinion. Heck, they even tested/tuned the XT at the Nurburgring! After 16,000+ miles, our XT still feels tight and rattle-free like when it was new. Its been a great vehicle. Maybe your dad would have been happier with a standard Forester as it is geared towards a softer ride. One last thing, the Forester is built off the same Impreza chassis as WRX so it has very similar suspension with parts interchangeability. The STI is tuned for an even more sporty ride so it is interesting that you don't find that ride harsh compared to the FXT.
i drove both 2015 top models while looking for a new vehicle to handle the terrain and weather here in colorado. it was a hands down win for the CX-5 on almost every level. i don't believe their 0-60 claim for the forester one second. it seemed slow mostly be cause you feel disconnected from the road. the forester sways like a boat and inspires zero confidence in the corners. i live at the end of a 2.4 mile dirt road in the rockies with a 1200 foot elevation gain. i've gone up it many times with 3-6 inches of snow in the mazda (with winter tires) and it's phenomenal. its nice to drive in the canyons and it really shines on the dirt. i would think the "offroad" win here goes to the mazda because of the way it handles bumps and slides. granted, i never took the forester off road, but i wouldn't feel confident doing anything but putting around slowly on a dirt road with its huge roll problem. the ground clearance is slightly higher in the forester, but really isn't a big enough difference for 99.9% of users to even notice. i only have 3 complaints about the mazda cx-5. 1. it needs a bigger sunroof, though its not small, just jealous of sunroof's you see on the new jeep cherokees. 2. more power, the fuel economy is nice, but a low boost, quick spool turbo would be nice for another 50 hp. 3. tomtom (or as the wife and i call it - dumbdumb). its 2016 (2015 when we bought it) why isn't there google maps??! the tomtom sat nav is so clunky, it locks you out when you're moving. the voice command sucks so bad i'll actually pull over to get directions. it doesn't seem to notice which direction you're heading, when you search for gas stations its libel only to show you ones you've already passed. and it doesn't map your results, just a list with distance. its so archaic! makes me frustrated just thinking about it! anywho, back to the mazda. it looks amazing (for an suv). i've had more than a few people ask me about what it was when we got it. less so nowadays as they seem to be getting very popular in the mountains. i'd also like to point out the mazda design (inside and out) has a consistent theme to it, it looks like they cared about placement and flow which makes for a much nicer driving experience. the forester we test drove looked like every linear foot was designed by a different team and was just hodgepodged together. i seriously think they need to hire some new designers. zoom zoom!
Subaru Forrester because it has the best all-wheel-drive system and its standard that's a fact just search for Subaru Forrester all-wheel-drive. Next reason Subaru has the best pre collision breaking right now. And the last reason it has the best crash test ratings it was the only SUV to get a good rating for 2014 in the small overlap test.
in the Comfort category, would have liked it if you guys had mentioned NOISE. Which is quieter, wind noise etc...
What's good about the 2.0L when you can't feel the powertrain of your car due to it's CVT?
exactly
I presumably you guys didn't try the CVT on the Subaru Forester. Its not just like the typical CVT on a Honda. It mimics like how a traditional Automatic gearbox with 8 speed gear change on Sports mode.
Try Forester first, with its CVT, then write comments...
I had a forester xt. It was pretty fun to drive and surprisingly quick. Tint the windows and slap some dark rims on it and it looks pretty dope. But I bought it cuz I live in tahoe and no other car shreds snow like a subie. Subie all day long for me but I do have to agree the Mazda is pretty sharp looking.
Im glad for you,but are you sure? How many mils on yours?
Why not use an AWD CX-5 to represent a comparison consumers would actually make. The Forester would have stomped an AWD CX-5 handily. An AWD Touring CX-5 cost about two grand more than a Premium Forester, gets two fewer highway mpg, has 3.1 cubic feet less cargo capacity, 43.7 cubic feet less interior volume, weighs 166 pounds more, has 50 less miles of range between fill ups, and cost eight cents more a mile to own for five years (so a grand more a year) when compared to the Forester, all information taken from your own website. With stats like that who would buy the Mazda instead of the Subie? People that like to piss away a grand more a year for less utility?
Noah E This is a good point. I looked at Edmunds cost of ownership calculator, and it was about 5k difference in favor of the Subaru. However, most of this was due to depreciation, not fuel economy. They are about the same with that. Subarus seem to have better resale value.
Love my Mazda CX 5, had the Subaru Impreza . 100km/7Ltr vs 100km/8Ltr premium. Service is also a lot cheaper, I like a car from A-B and don't try to win the Monte Carlo Rally.
I'm going to be buying a subaru soon, I've owned 3 mazdas in the past. Subaru is much more dependable then mazda. I'm looking at interior space , mpgs, and dependability. I looked at the cx5's and I'm 6'2' I felt scrunched up in there. And all mazdas look the same these days. I'm definitely buying subaru, they last for years and years.
Depends what you want, how big you are and what your interests are. Test drove all these SUV type vehicles in the UK 18 months ago. At 6'4'' wanted a car that would be good for business use, practical for outdoor use, towing caravans and carrying dogs/golf clubs. Mazda CX5 was too small for me, didn't seem to hold the road so well and failed miserably with the golf clubs. Had the manual diesel XC for 15 months and can't complain. Love driving it. Just wish we got our cars in the UK at the prices the US pay!!!!!
I am in the market for this range Crossover SUV and have been going back and forth between several models. Only one's left for consideration are CX-5, Forester, and VW Tiguan. Driving is fun with Tiguan and CX-5. The vibility of Forester is too good to pass as family siting in the back seats won't get car sick and it will be a joy ride for them. Tiguan visibility is also very good and the panoramic Sunroof makes Tiguan ride feel so pleasant while second row feels little tight. If you are fully loading these vehicles they could be getting into the territory of Base model Volvo XC60 which has some great promos to make it appealing.
This review is pretty bad.
Don't forget the Forester 2.5L has OIL CONSUMPTION issue. See owner forums.
While I agree with the conclusion, the scoring was mostly superficial and flawed. For example, giving a point to the Forester because a Turbo engine exists, where as all other handling attributes favor the CX-5 is wrong.
oil consumption issue was addressed with redesigned piston rings in late 2013. the oil consumption issued has been addressed a while ago, it's just getting a lot of noise recently due to the class action suit. the class action suit stems from the fact that subaru did not address the problem early on. subaru has taken full responsibility of the problem and is swapping out the short blocks of any affected engine starting in 2011 until early 2014 models that have the problem.
the Subaru Forester is a better engineered vehicle than anything else out there, period. it makes the 4WD system on other cross-overs look like toys. people have never purchased Subarus for their looks, they bought them for their utility, their safety, and their value. i would take a base model Subaru Forester 2.5i any day over a CR-V EX-L
jgg204
Well, according to real owners there are some 2014s which consume oil too.
In addition, some folks with 2012 vehicles had their shortblock replaced with a new one, and they still consume oil....
The question is if you believe the issue was addressed *completely*, not just mitigation / partial solution, like by overfilling FB engines with oil (what Subaru has been doing for a while).
It looks like 2015 will be the year we will find out for sure. Until then, I would not buy a Subaru with an FB engine.
The reason why the class action suit came about was due to the fiasco in the early years. You are right, dealerships were overfilling by a quart and pretending nothing was wrong, short block replacements were still resulting in oil consumption, Subaru corporate had nothing to say about the issue nor any real plan or solution in place to fix the problem. People got fed up and the class action suit was formed. However keep the following things in mind:
- The short block was never the problem, it was the piston rings. It was cheaper for Subaru and less labor intensive for the dealers to just have an entire short block assembly sent to them and swapped out vs having a Subaru Master Tech re-assemble everything back together and worry about clearances at each step. Early on Subaru did not know what the problem was so they were swapping out short block assemblies with fresh short block assemblies off the production line that still had the original piston ring design.
- Subaru more than any other car manufacture has their model years ahead of the actual calendar year. The prime example of this is the Subaru Forester where in Feb 2014, the 2014 model transitioned to the 2015 model. Going in reverse, the 2014 model actually covered most of the 2013 calendar year. Since the piston rings were redesigned in 2013, it means that some 2014 models received the new piston rings at the factory and others did not. As of the writing of this right now, there have not been any 2015 model year vehicles with the oil consumption issue. If you want to verify that, go to subaruforester.org and subaruoutback.org, also check out car complaints, do whatever you need to do. I have a 2015 Subaru Forester that does not burn any oil which is a relief to me, coming from a 12 yr old Civic that burned 1 qt a month. So I know when there is oil consumption and the mid-late 2014s, and 2015s do not have it
Now with all of that said, it does not make it right how Subaru handled things early on. A lot of customers were screwed over, many got so fed up they traded in the vehicle and lost thousands on the trade in, many customers have wasted countless hour at the dealership waiting for their vehicles to be "fixed" only to then have the same issue. I get that, I would be frustrated as well and I would be right in on that class action suit with everyone else. However, to come onto youtube video sites and prob others and blast paranoia nonsense that is irrelevant now, is misguided to say the least. Do you go onto every youtube review of a 2014/2015 Toyota vehicle and bring up the acceleration issue?
jgg204
Why irrelevant? It is relevant until proven otherwise. Which is exactly my point that I do not trust Subaru has fixed the problem completely until it has been verified.
Verification takes time, but until then people would be smart to stay away.
David Lee What kind of additional verification criteria are you looking for?
why would you give the Mazda a point for cargo when it can fit a dog and holds more cargo? Biased a little or trying to keep it close? Also, the Mazda is a real off-road capable small SUV. Which would I prefer to talk off road or in the snow..? The Subaru. Mazda does look better, so I give it points for that... but it's slower and less practical. Thumbs down on this review for it's biased, subjective, and overall sell out review.
That's true, they gave Suby points for performance with a CVT?!!You gotta be kidding.
Agreed.
I want to wait for the 2019 Forester with the new platform and then I will test drive both of these vehicles comparing 2019 each. Right now I'm leaning toward the Subaru. Never owned either brand.
Only have refilled my new 2016 CX-5 Touring once, so take that with a grain of salt. Did lots of research prior to buying this car..Wife, even made an excel spreadsheet to compare Outback, Rav 4 and CX-5. There is little to no road noise.. Plus most of us listen to music anyways.. Wish it had a little more cargo room, and memory seats, but I can't complain for the price, technology package included. Love the power, where power is needed, smooth ride and look. FYI, free navigation updates for 3 years. Bose stereo sounds incredible and now don't mind being stuck in traffic! Test drive one, you won't be disappointed. One more thing, read and watch all the popular review forums, sites, youtube. They are not being paid to praise how well Mazda has done on their 2016 CX-5.
I chose the Forester and really like it. However, the single point that I am not terribly keen on is the dual screen infotainment system. The system on the outback is far superior. I can make an analogy, the Forester infotainment system is like working with a computer with DOS while the Outback is like Windows...
The Forester XT has always been/will be the best SUV.
What do you like better - The Forester or the CX-5?
The Subaru
100% the Forester.
forester XT all the way
XT?
We have a 13 CX5 GT AWD and absolutely love it. So much nicer than the forester and so much better looking as well. We have the sky blue paint which you don't see on any other SUV... Unlike all the bland ugly colors offered on the subie.... Subaru makes a nice car but you get more bang for your buck with the MAZDA..
What about reliability, cost of ownership? These are not important?
+Jill Thompson Yes, this review is horrible. I'd fire the guys for a poor review.
not good cvt? its the best there is from all other reviews I heard/read.
If you could get the Forester turbo in a manual
Yup! I bought a 2013 outback 3.6 because it was the last year you could get the 5eat. I think subaru is making an enormous mistake not offering a manual in all models. The kind of people who buy subarus are predominately people who prefer a stick.
Forester IMO but the CX5 is close behind. And the only one I would get is an XT. Not sure how the CX5 is considered more fun to drive when you can have a 250hp turbo in the Subie. Im also a little confused at how one of the top considerations for buyers today is SAFETY and yet that wasn't even a category. The Subaru is a top safety pick + and got the best rating in the tough small overlap IIHS crash a couple years ago.
What about the most important category: reliability? I didn't hear a peep about that key subject..
I test drove each of these cars before deciding on the Forester. The CX5 has a nicer interior that holds you in place. The way they designed the cars visibility is a major flaw, forcing you to rely on their side collision warning system. The forester is massively better on visibility. It's always funny to see each reviewer complain about the aesthetics of the car, when that's what makes it great while driving. Their CVT system is great, and not too noisy when I kick my XT into sport mode and zip onto the freeway. On that note the standard 2.5 has 174hp vs. the CX5's fastest 2.0 at 184hp (that's a small difference) the XT is 250hp, again, that is not a small difference! This review is garbage in my opinion because they're giving it to the CX5 basically because of looks. Buying an SUV even a sport versions purpose is to do more than a Sudan or hatch back, not ge super cool to look at. Consumer reports gave it to the forester as best sport SUV.
I would agree in regards to visibility the forester is excellent.
Check out the 2016CX-5s tutone leather . NICE.
The Subaru latest advancements in lineartronics CVT is probably much better than Mazda dated automatic transmission which is not as fast to response. This CVT is also used in the auto variant of the WRX which demonstrates its robustness and responsiveness to handle high torque and horsepower engines. The CVT still throws your back to the seat in the XT model when you really want immediate burst of acceleration. CVT works well with competent engines as it helps to improve acceleration timings without requiring the driver to understand the engine charteristics well and have good hand muscles to handle a manual shifter. Subaru boxer engines have good torque characteristics which suits a CVT. On the other hand, a weak engine like the one in the Mitsubishi outlander 2.4 mated to a CVT gives you the underpowered and rubber band effects, especially on a heavy SUV.
+SK L Who are you trying to convince? You or us? Seems like you are justifying your purchase instead of enjoying it. CVTs are constantly receiving terrible reviews, because, well, they suck. Good fuel economy, but they suck. Just because a trans is traditional auto, doesn't mean its dated. Like I said before, who are you trying to convince?
+J C I am trying to bring my point to folks whom have not really tried out those modern CVTs implementations before shouting that they sucks. It is easy to form opinions simply based on past negative reviews around older CVTs in general. There are good traditional auto and bad CVTs and vice versa. The best case is to test drive the car and feel for yourself how the car and engine works with the transmission. I wouldn't really says a 6speed auto is dated but the advantages of having more gears ratio works well for fuel consumption and linearity of progression. On the fuel efficiency part which Mazda has its own forte in increasing engine compression to improve it. Car should be reviewed as a system working together., not on individual components.
I'll take my all-wheel-drive any day!
I like to keep it simpl.
And last but not least, I know the CX-5 can't beat the Subaru in it's safety!
I am thinking of purchasing a Forester and watched this video out of curiosity. I took it for a test drive and thought the subaru was fantastic. It handled well, wasn't over the top noisy, had the bells and whistles that I wanted, plus subaru's are supposed to be very reliable. I owned a Mazda 626 and it was a horrible car, I started having problems at 10,000 miles and finally ended up getting rid of it. So that puts me off to Mazda, of course i could have just gotten a lemon.
Why don't you have the XT? It has a great CVT transmission!
The mazda cx-5 is best
Forester, let's see that wimpy Mazda on ice! Also safety first, subarus are the number 1 safest car 😉
I'm a subaru fan, but have to give credit where credit is do and the mazda is actually really good AWD, and actually outshines the subaru on initial takeoff. I'd still pick the subie thou
NO vehicle is good on ice. Studded tires can help, but if you're going too fast, even they make no difference.
The cvt system that Subaru has is actually very good and I prefer it to a 6/7 speed automatic unless it's a DCT
CX-5 (for me) and it's not even close. The CX-5 is lighter and based on the Mazda3 platform which are two of the many reasons it's so much fun to drive. It has a free-revving engine and is offered with a brilliant manual transmission. It gets great gas mileage and it looks amazing in any color. The CX-5 interior is very straightforward and ergonomic so I have no idea what they're talking about in this video unless they're referring to the infotainment system. The Subbie has more power but also weighs considerably more, auto comes as a gross CVT, is no fun to drive, and it looks positively depressing. About the only practical reasons for preferring the Forester would be better rear window visibility and better off-road capability.
Basically If you want a CUV that is a "driver's car", go with the CX-5. If you want to go off road sometimes, go with the Forester.
I have already eliminated the Forester from my list. You mentioned its bland styling and lack of driving personality. But there is also its universally panned infotainment system. The reviews I've read say that system is confusing and difficult to use.
Everyone NEEDS to check the 2015 Vehicle Quality Study by JD Power. Hyundai and KIA now make the highest quality and most reliable vehicles in the auto industry. I highly recommend that people buy the 2016 Hyundai Tucson and 2016 KIA Sportage.
Mazda, Fiat and Subaru were ranked at the bottom and had poor quality and poor reliability.
Times have changed.
Marcus Jensen Korea is the most technologically advanced country in the world. It's no surprise they also make the highest quality vehicles. German cars still make the best driver's cars though.
Japanese cars have fallen behind.
Marcus Jensen The 2016 Hyundai Tucson looks stunning!
Marcus Jensen Hyundai is the largest contract defence manufacturer in the world, manufacturing the world's most technologically advanced army tank, the K2 Black Panther. Hyundai makes the best SUV's in the industry, period.
Marcus Jensen I am from JAPAN and here is my opinion:
1. Korean cars (Hyundai and KIA) are very high quality.
2. Mazda is known to be "poor man's car" in Japan.
3. Rich Japanese people prefer to buy German cars.
Marcus Jensen Subaru topped the list for 2015.( compact SUV's) consumer reports in all categories. Check consumer reports.
the mazda's design is hot,the front and the back is nice.what i don't like about other cars is that it's only hot at the front part like the toyota vios 2015
my brother's 2013 mazda is falling apart due to rust here in Montreal, as every other mazda I know. I have a 1994 subaru SVX running like new as a daily commuter. Zero problems, But my wife's 2014 Subaru Forester XT suffers of "brake fade". Even it's equipped with Eyesight, I hit the car in front of me in a regular family summer day driving in the highway, with a stop and go traffic... and Subaru still does not explain me what is wrong with my brakes...
look in the winter which one is the best, build quality etc... this already for many years. Subaru is the best....
I watch the Edmunds, KBB and CR reviews to get an overall sense of a vehicle, specially it's reliability. However, no mention here of the very serious oil consumption flaws of the Forester. Only going over the superficial values of a vehicle is good up to a point, but IMHO, the longevity of any vehicle is a true measure of it's overall quality.
www.torquenews.com/1084/2nd-new-oil-consumption-lawsuit-suddenly-filed-against-subaru
Aesthetics and a more sporty ride = CX5
Outward visibility and utility = Forester
I think the CX5 is a much nicer looking car, but the Forester is MUCH nicer to look out of. The Forester also better exemplifies the "utility" of an SUV.
Subaru FORESTER always no comparison
The CX5 like so many SUV is a fashion item, whereas the Forester is designed for those who actually want a real 4x4 without the defender ruggedness.
The bachelor in me would rather get the Mazda purely for the 'personality' factor, but since I am now in fact a family man, sounds like Forester is the smarter choice for Canadian winters with AWD, and space for carseats/strollers.
And you didn't even mentioned about the AWD capability for both these 2 vehicle. These are the crossover vehicles, but you are making a comparison like the super car challenging each other on the highway? Nuts!
you guys really need to hang it up. The Subaru Linertronic CVT is constantly rated the best there is....
CX-5 handing and interior wins
its too slow in my opinion, regardless of the fuel savings. when i downshift by flooring my automatic cx-5 it is near instant. these eco-CVT's are still fairly slow. a shame cause CVT will ultimately be the way to go. the only subaru's that matter anymore are the WRX (non-sti) and maybe the BRZ (though it needs some muscle and AWD).
My test drive of a fully loaded '17 Forester XT Limited left me feeling that the power was adequate but not impressive. The CVT is good but could use some reprogramming. The visibility inside is by far the best in the market. The handling is great, predictable and confidence inspiring, but far from enjoyable.
LEDeve S In regards to visibility I agree. Forester has the best visibility.
Both aren't that good.
The best SUV in this segment is going to be the 2016 Hyundai Tucson. Just look it up guys. Superb modern design coupled with new improved handling from Hyundai. Hyundai's 2015 vehicles all have superb handling, a huge change from previous years.
Shirazi I agree. Hyundai knows how to make better SUV's than any other Asian car manufacturer.
Shirazi Hyundai cars also have superior power-to-weight ratios than all Japanese cars in the same segment.
Just compare the 2015 Hyundai Sonata with the 2015 Honda Accord. At the same RPMs, the 2015 Sonata has 2X more torque output compared to the 2015 Accord.
The Japanese auto makers have fallen way behind.
Shirazi Korean cars are technologically superior and have higher reliability compared to Japanese cars.
Shirazi Your kidding right ? Korean cars' handling is like crap.
Nguyen Tran agree. korean cars' interiors are also far from looking premium
I love the look of the cx-5 compared to other CUV's, but i would not buy a CUV unless it has AWD and a turbo charged engine. How about Mazda throws an old mazdaSpeed3 engine in one of these?
I have a CX5 2.2 diesel sport nav AWD 6 speed automatic and it's a brilliant car. There's some good TH-cam videos of the CX5's off road performance and it's impressive.
In the US, diesel is sadly not an option for either of these cars. Fingers crossed that that will change sometime soon.
the cx-5 looks way better
I would chose the mazda
If you like to drive, it is!
OK. So I'll ask the question. Why are they not comparing these as crossovers? The purpose of purchasing a crossover is to obtain the functionality of a mix of car-like and SUV like features/qualities. Otherwise, just buy a darned regular car. Agree with many others here. The areas of comparison had NOTHING to do with looking at the vehicles from those perspectives. IMHO (and it's just that). You wanna know what people who use crossovers for their actual functionality drive? Go to Alaska or western Canada in the Rockies. See if you can count 1 - CX5 for every 10 - Foresters you see in Fairbanks or Anchorage Alaska. There is a reason we used to joke that Subaru is the State car of Alaska. They have the utility, features, reliability and durability that others in the segment simply don't.
The Subaru isn't fun to drive? Dafuq? They're a blast to drive, especially the turbo ones!
These are both fantastic cars. They didn't talk about reliability. They both have excellent reliability track records but hands down a naturally aspirated motor will be more reliable than the turbo time bomb under the hood of that Subaru. I love my 2002 2.5 NA forester but I'm eyeballing the CX-7 to replace it.
I would assume over time, the Subaru would be a more expensive upkeep. More so if you stick with two wheel drive on the CX-7.
For as long as I can remember (MX-5, MX-6, 626, 323) Mazda's were always prone to rusting, despite rust proofing the vehicle.
Cars rust. They are all prone to rusting. Most people don't drive a car long enough for them to rust these days anyways.
My first Subaru was a loyale that was so ridiculously rusty it was more replacement metal and bondo then original body when I was done with it. My Forester has several visible rust spots. My two MX-5s (one the same age as the forester) were 100% rust free but I didn't drive them in salt.
Don't forget foresters were notorious for rusting out the lift gate at the wiper. I'm not pedling one over the other mind you, just that all cars rust :).
Trent Robinson : Really? Our 304K miles Subaru doesn't have any rust and it's 15 years old and driven in the snow.
FrankTheRabbit The CX-5 has plastic cladding along the underbody and wheel wells - where all the weather sprays up when you drive, so it should be much safer from rust than other mazdas.
I have had very bad luck with the 2013 -2015 subarus. 2013 wrx 3 transmitions withing 40,000 miles. 2014 subaru legacy was the worst by far, awd failure ,anti lock break failure , steering failure, traction control actually caused me to get into an accident. Let me explain while going down a steep hill on a right hand turn my passenger side tires hit a patch of snow and locked up , sending the rotational force to the driver side , causing the car to violent turn hard to the right and pushed me off the road and caused an accident. Also the car will hesitate when pulling out from a stop , is very bad if the car is on a slight bit of gravel the car will stop in the middle of the street and then after a second re engage the power, not to mention the stalling and countless other problems . Have been to the dealer multiple times and they have said the car is functioning as intended , even contacted subaru corporate , had the same experience . If you decide to look at a subaru during the test drive ask to test the awd system if they say no or have no way for you to test it leave and do not trust them.
I really want to like the Forester but it's just so damn plain looking! If the Forester looked like the CX-5 I would buy one tomorrow! Especially with a turbo!
Well, if you get the Forester XT, you'd be driving so fast by them, they won't even have time to notice what you're driving.
Fully agree.
Get the Forester and mod it like mine! th-cam.com/video/IcbF5bczjHI/w-d-xo.html Make it better!
We got the Forester. Utility and ease of use won the day and our dollars.
Forester makes it up the hill. Just imagine how embarrassing it'll be to be stuck on snowy hill in a CX-5.
th-cam.com/video/wLkvqsQEV2Q/w-d-xo.html
Style wise, CX5 is much better...performance wise, forester XT is more powerful than CX5.I personally will choose forester over CX5 because of practicality, powerful, plus power liftgate which CX5 doesn't even offer it as an option!
I would buy the Forester
The awd in the Subaru is way better. The Mazda gets stuck everywhere lmao i drove both
Can I get a Forester with Mazda Look and Feel. I like the torque in Mazda but the XT option is off the table in 2019. I am deciding soon, and I think Forester come with a deep design change (who cares if they copy Mazda or Lexus or Porsche, I need one),.. Hope Subaru pays attention to looks and performances. The aspirated engines lack guts, boring looks, and struggles to ramp up on hilly ramps. Subaru is so painful, but a great car
II'm all about the forester but using they didn't use the awed version because they were comparing base models the xt has he much better interior so I'm sure it would have won
I went with the forester 😅 literally the model in this video
I'm confused how Mazda won the interior category... he went on to talk about daily usable cargo space which was less than the Subaru yet it won the category with no real explanation. Also, while most other reputable automotive journalists give high praise to the cvt in the Subaru, you guys call it not very good. Again, with no real explanation. It isn't a conventional cvt like Nissan uses, it has preset gears. For all interested, there is a video on TH-cam that puts car enthusiasts in the Forester and they were unable to tell it was even a cvt (it was set into sport mode on the xt). I really like the Mazda, it is much better looking, I am certain it handles sportier, and it's cheaper, it would have been easy to praise it for valid reasons and critique the Subaru for valid reasons, like road and wind noise at highway speed. Just my 2 cents.
Totally agree with you how the CX5 won the interior category. lol Safety ratings are also better on the Forester, according to IIHS.
if only the Mazda had more power, i have to say that turbocharged engine in the Subaru just stole the cake.the mazda is more stylish in and out, better to drive, interior quality way better than the Subaru but, 2 sec difference in 0-60 is alot and for an SUV which will be filled with passengers and cargo power is a bless =)
Wait till you try the new Forester SK
Ooooh 2 seconds faster! Dorks
I do admit this latest version of the subaru is worse looking than the previous one which still is a very good looking car. So not sure what subaru were thinking with the styling. But i want a car that goes in all weather not just something that looks good and gets you about.
I like 2016 cx-5.. I like the forester without the CVT..
I had a mazda cx5 for a few days, it lacks power.
You had the 2013 with the 2.0...
nope 2014 loaded, 2.5L
So get a mazdaseed3. This wasn't made to go fast.
I have a 08 mazda 3 with the larger engine, and ya was in getting new struts when I had the cx5, thus it felt slow
***** The 2.5 CX-5 is actually the quickest NA in the class. If you are looking for something that does sub-7 sec 0-60, a compact CUV is the last place to look for "power"...
I want a mazda speed cx-5
The CX5 has a nice sporty look, but for me personally I like a larger SUV and the Forester would fit that bill. Although I will agree that the interior is drab, with that said i would still pick the Forester but only the 2016 model.
....and the winner is......Honda CR-V. LOL. This is a very tough competitive segment and it boils down to style preference. Forester, CX-5, CR-V, Rogue, Escape, are all competent small SUV/Crossvers. I'd go with the Honda CR-V after driving all of them the last couple of weeks as we narrow down our selection. The Honda just seems to edge them all for me in ride, design, fit and finish ad overall feel in class. Honda's CVT is better than Subaru hands down in my personal experience. It's very smooth. Now, that Forester is a lot of fun to drive though talking about the one with the true zoom, zoom. Thumbs up!
No way when it come to off roading the cx-5 will bow down to the forester and that's for sure. Oh I forgot to mention the forester also perform very well on road as well. I'm side with the forester.
you obviously haven't driven either. imagine driving a mx-5 vs a school bus...
You're comparing an SUV to a budget sports car? That's a bold move.
not that bold. i've driven both. the cx-5 can be pushed pretty far...
One thing they didn't mention was road noise. The Mazda has a lot more road noise than the Subaru. The Forester also comes in 8 trim levels, the Mazda only offers 3. When the Mazda Kodo design came out on the 2014 Mazda 6 it was a head turner. At least until every other model Mazda makes adopted it. Now all Mazdas seem to look alike. The Mazda 3 looks like a small 6. The CX5 looks like a small CX7, etc...
To be fair, and the inside of the Forester looks like a Impreza.
Mazda 5, Miata and Mazda 2 dont look anything like the CX-5. Try again?
There will also be loyal Subie fans. I almost was one until friends how owned turbo powered Subies in the past said stay away, as they had various issues.
Exactly,add chains and Wranglers and your Forester wont go there .. Then there is th OIL USE... NOT FIXD AFTER 2013...rad the complaints.
Forester is da best who wants cx5 I mean like it's not really for everyone, it's more for just some people