CRV vs CX5 VS Forester (2023 models)

[jadmt]

My wife's Honda CRV was totaled by a driver who thought stop signs were optional. was about a 50 mph impact wife was pretty banged up and suffered a broken hand and much soft tissue damage where the seatbelt restrained her. Anyway I am waiting on the insurance adjuster to tell me what they are going to offer for the crv. they have already taken it to a Coparts a salvage/wrecking yard. I have kind of narrowed it down to these 3. the Forester really just popped into the equation as I did not even realize they had been revised recently.

The insurance company rented us a cx5 and my BIL and MIL each have one and like them but my BIL is 74 yoa and my MIL 84 so we have different criteria . we have had a 1997 CRV, 2014 and 2016 and they have been ok but not like I loved them. I liked the 97 best but I was a lot younger then probably remember it differently than it really was. Any way the Mazda that was rented for us is a 2021 with ~60,000 miles and it seems pretty clapped out for that new of a vehicle but I know rentals get beat like mules. Our 2016 CRV also had 60,000 miles and was still like new. Seems like the CX5's are a lot more plentiful on the lot vs either the CRV or Forester. I think if I get a CX5 it would be the turbo version. Does anyone have any experience with the new Forester and CX5 turbo? We had a 2016 Outback and my wife hated it and we only kept it for 6 months before trading for the CRV. I guess in the grand scheme of things the CRV did pretty well in the crash.

 

[MFurey]

In context of your other post on the Mazda, what about the new Honda Pilot Trailsport? Forester is one of the safest vehicles out there, and has great visibility, and tons of cargo space.

 

[LRNAD90]

We bought a 2022 CX-5 Turbo recently, primarily as our daughter's daily, but really as an additional family car. It has nice pick-up, but its a front wheel drive based awd system (as are most in this class), and there is enough power on tap for easily apparent torque steer (it scoots to 60 in the low 6 second range).

That being said it is as 'European' feeling as we could find in the class, meaning it has a pretty solid feel, and drives/handles more like a German brand than most vehicles in its class we tried (It is no BMW, but approaches that feel better than most compact SUVs seem to).

It will run on premium for added power, or regular for a slightly lower peak output. Honestly, couldn't really tell the difference, and given fuel prices, we are happy to be able to run it on regular.

We also liked the BMW like Infotainment controller, and it has the full suite of safety features, blind spot warning, rear cross traffic alert, auto emergency braking, radar cruise control, and has a load of luxury level features like heated front and back seats, cooled front seats, heated steering wheel, HUD. The only thing we found lacking feature wise was no surround view camera, it is only available on the highest Signature trim level. But the visibility is very good and our daughter finds it much easier to park than our other cars.

We recently took it on a college tour trip, and it averaged 27-29 mpg on the highway stints (much of it at 80+ mph), and the radar cruise was really nice in heavy traffic, it would slow down and speed up maintaining distance in front of you very well, and only needing driver input to resume if it comes to a full stop.

Fuel economy is not the best in its class, but not bad at all, averaging mid 20's in mostly around town driving, and high 20's on the highway (as mentioned). Many direct competitors do better here, but that is the trade off for me. Rather have the better driving dynamics.

Glad to hear you liked your CR-V, but personally hated them when we were looking at options..

Also, since safety is probably top of your mind right now, the CX-5 is the only car in its class that currently gets good ratings in the new National Institute for Highway Safety's new side impact tests..

 

[jadmt]

In context of your other post on the Mazda, what about the new Honda Pilot Trailsport? Forester is one of the safest vehicles out there, and has great visibility, and tons of cargo space.

I would want a Pilot or passport but my wife nixed either as too big. I actually tried to talk her into something bigger but no go.

 

[Buddha.]

I liked my ‘17 forester 2.5 but it burned oil from day one even though they said they had fixed the issue.

 

[jbaucom]

We had a 2016 Outback and my wife hated it

What did she hate about the Outback? It may impact how she'd feel about a new Forester. We had a 2015 Forester and really enjoyed it, and we traded it at 106,000 miles for a new 2020 Subaru Ascent which we also enjoy. Subaru builds a safe vehicle, but pretty much everyone does these days.

Edited to add: The new Forester is no longer offered with a turbo. The only drivetrain is the NA 2.5 w/ CVT, the same as a regular Outback.

 

[jadmt]

We bought a 2022 CX-5 Turbo recently, primarily as our daughter's daily, but really as an additional family car. It has nice pick-up, but its a front wheel drive based awd system (as are most in this class), and there is enough power on tap for easily apparent torque steer (it scoots to 60 in the low 6 second range).

That being said it is as 'European' feeling as we could find in the class, meaning it has a pretty solid feel, and drives/handles more like a German brand than most vehicles in its class we tried (It is no BMW, but approaches that feel better than most compact SUVs seem to).

It will run on premium for added power, or regular for a slightly lower peak output. Honestly, couldn't really tell the difference, and given fuel prices, we are happy to be able to run it on regular.

We also liked the BMW like Infotainment controller, and it has the full suite of safety features, blind spot warning, rear cross traffic alert, auto emergency braking, radar cruise control, and has a load of luxury level features like heated front and back seats, cooled front seats, heated steering wheel, HUD. The only thing we found lacking feature wise was no surround view camera, it is only available on the highest Signature trim level. But the visibility is very good and our daughter finds it much easier to park than our other cars.

We recently took it on a college tour trip, and it averaged 27-29 mpg on the highway stints (much of it at 80+ mph), and the radar cruise was really nice in heavy traffic, it would slow down and speed up maintaining distance in front of you very well, and only needing driver input to resume if it comes to a full stop.

Fuel economy is not the best in its class, but not bad at all, averaging mid 20's in mostly around town driving, and high 20's on the highway (as mentioned). Many direct competitors do better here, but that is the trade off for me. Rather have the better driving dynamics.

Glad to hear you liked your CR-V, but personally hated them when we were looking at options..

Also, since safety is probably top of your mind right now, the CX-5 is the only car in its class that currently gets good ratings in the new National Institute for Highway Safety's new side impact tests..

that is no different than our crv gets/got for mpg. I mentioned the crv's were just ok but that I did not love the crv. one of my reservations of the Mazda is it seems like the seats are a little short but maybe it is just how used the rental is. One youtube video comparo compared the cx5 and the forester and basically said the cx5 was best in all aspects but in the end he choose the Forester weird.. One thing that I worry a bit about is there are a lot less dealerships. I do like sportier handling and more power is always good.

 

[jadmt]

I liked my ‘17 forester 2.5 but it burned oil from day one even though they said they had fixed the issue.

yes that is a concern. I have had 4 subarus and 3 needed headgaskets replaced. the 2016 we did not keep long enough barely change the oil, but I had a buddy at the time who was a service manager at a subby dealership and he said even in 2016 they were still having issues. I have not paid any attention since we got rid of it so not sure if that is still a thing.

 

[LRNAD90]

Meant to include this in my original post..

 

[Dougnuts]

I’d get a CX-50 or a RAV4 hybrid before I bought another car with a traditional CVT (CRV or Subaru).

 

[jadmt]

What did she hate about the Outback? It may impact how she'd feel about a new Forester. We had a 2015 Forester and really enjoyed it, and we traded it at 106,000 miles for a new 2020 Subaru Ascent which we also enjoy. Subaru builds a safe vehicle, but pretty much everyone does these days.

Edited to add: The new Forester is no longer offered with a turbo. The only drivetrain is the NA 2.5 w/ CVT, the same as a regular Outback.

The road/wind noise was terrible. I found a service bulletin for a fix but the dealership said our vin was just outside the range of affected vins so they would not perform the fix. Last straw was it developed a high pitch squeal that sounded like a wheel bearing. The service writer agreed it was not right but said drive it until it failed. This was on a six month old top of the line outback. Subaru did apologize and promised to make things right. They were about a week late as i already traded it.

 

[gnel]

We got a cx-5 turbo last year (wifes car). I can't find anything to complain about except the useless nav system. She's coming from a 2010 Nissan Rogue and you can´t compare the 2. The cx-5 is on a totally different level. I was so happy to ditch that cvt.

 

[LRNAD90]

We got a cx-5 turbo last year (wifes car). I can't find anything to complain about except the useless nav system. She's coming from a 2010 Nissan Rogue and you can´t compare the 2. The cx-5 is on a totally different level. I was so happy to ditch that cvt.

Oh, we didn't pay for the NAV software, just use Apple Car play, seems like onboard NAV is quickly being phased out by Carplay/Android Auto..

And yeah, CVTs suck, I wouldn't buy anything with one. Some reviews complain that the CX-5 still uses a 6 speed auto, I think its a positive..

 

[jadmt]

We got a cx-5 turbo last year (wifes car). I can't find anything to complain about except the useless nav system. She's coming from a 2010 Nissan Rogue and you can´t compare the 2. The cx-5 is on a totally different level. I was so happy to ditch that cvt.

coming from Honda nav even a paper map and compass would be an improvement. we just use carplay now.

 

[jadmt]

Test drove a 2023 CRV touring hybrid and a 2023 CX5 turbo back to back. There were no Foresters to even sit in. Did sit in a Ascent and interior seemed nice but did not want to even drive it as it is not something I am interested in. CRV was nice but familiar as it definitely similar in ways to our old 2016 CRV touring even tho there are lots of updates. I could live with one, but msrp is over $40,000 and they are not willing to come off msrp and will not sell without an added protection package which to me is bs.

The Mazda for sure has a lot more fun factor and is a bit quieter than the Honda and feels more solid or planted on the road, but I do think the Honda has slightly better shaped front seats. Seems the mazda seating portion is a little short and neither my wife (5'2") nor myself are tall people, I am 5'9" but the seats are nice otherwise. I wish the Mazda's info center was a touch screen as it is not really all the seemless to toggle thru the different screens/functions. Mazda definitely wins in the drivetrain portion transmission just feels matched to the more powerful and responsive motor.

The Salesperson had to go in the Honda so was not really able to romp on it. The Mazda salesperson did not even ask for my driver's license and just handed me the keys and said "go jump on the interstate and see you when you get back" Both salespersons were younger females very close to the same age mid 20's. The honda one asked about every 10 seconds what I thought of it so far which included asking how I liked it so far before I even exited the parking lot. I swear she asked what feature I liked best 5 times during the test drive. The Mazda salesperson met us at the door on return and said "I hope you liked it" and then asked if I had any questions. Seems like two different training styles Honda is try and sell the car and Mazda let the car sell itself. Mazda is also not coming off msrp but does not require any other add-ons and has a minimal doc fee compared to Honda's $199 vs $499 which both did say were not negotiable.