I'm looking into buying a 2016 Mazda CX-5 2.5l with the tech package or a 2015 Subaru Forester 2.0L XT Touring.Both are great but I have heard that the Mazda 2.5L at 184hp is sluggish and that rust and unreliability happens a lot.I know that for 2016 a new infotainment and navigation system will be offered.The small redesign of the Mazda for 2016 makes it stand out.Does the Mazda seem cheap compared to the Subaru?Any insight would be great.Joe
Mazda or Subaru
- Thread starter Dually
- Start date
- Status
wemay
Site Donor 2023
From reading your post, I feel you answered your own question.
Personally I'd go for the Subaru. I have heard similar about modern Mazdas and seen a lot of the rust first hand on some very recent models. Some have had pretty severe rust after just 2-3 years in areas where the roads are salted and even coastal areas. Subarus tend to be very reliable although I know the 2.0 boxer in the BRZ has a very common bad habbit of spinning rod bearings. I'm not sure if the 2.0 in the Forester is the same engine with the same problems (maybe someone else can shed some light) but I've only heard of it in the BRZs and it's Scion and Toyota cousins.
We have a '15 CX-5 GT and absolutely love it.The '16 is even nicer.I don't feel the CX is sluggish.Quicker than the '13 CR-V we owned.
Rust is said not to be a problem like in the past I've read is Mazda double dips in zinc now.I'm a on a Mazda forum and haven't read of any CX-5 with signs of rust.Canadian owners on that forum have owned CX's for 3+ years without any rust.
I like the Outback but the wife preferred the CX-5 and I'm very happy with her choice.
The CX-5 does handle well and just feels great and with tech package is a great bang for the buck.
Rust is said not to be a problem like in the past I've read is Mazda double dips in zinc now.I'm a on a Mazda forum and haven't read of any CX-5 with signs of rust.Canadian owners on that forum have owned CX's for 3+ years without any rust.
I like the Outback but the wife preferred the CX-5 and I'm very happy with her choice.
The CX-5 does handle well and just feels great and with tech package is a great bang for the buck.
I would expect either vehicle to have enough power. Our 2008 CR-V (166 hp) has plenty of power for our tastes. Of course, the 265 hp MDX leaves it far behind, but I don't drive nearly as fast as I "mature in age". I think having kids has slowed me down.
I've sat in both (CX-5 was a '13 model) and I prefer the Forester by a moderate margin. The Mazda's seats are not comfortable to me and I don't care for the interior design. I think the Forester's dash is laid out more logically. I prefer the two-gauge cluster of the Forester vs. the CX-5's three-gauge cluster. Oh...and no discussion about small SUVs on BITOG can be considered complete until it's mentioned that only the Subaru can climb a hill of rollers...
If our CR-V was wrecked tomorrow and someone held a gun to my head and forced me to buy a new car, it'd be either another CR-V or a Forester/Outback. I like the Outback's styling better, but the Forester has a taller ceiling and a better seating position...or at least it feels like it.
I've sat in both (CX-5 was a '13 model) and I prefer the Forester by a moderate margin. The Mazda's seats are not comfortable to me and I don't care for the interior design. I think the Forester's dash is laid out more logically. I prefer the two-gauge cluster of the Forester vs. the CX-5's three-gauge cluster. Oh...and no discussion about small SUVs on BITOG can be considered complete until it's mentioned that only the Subaru can climb a hill of rollers...
If our CR-V was wrecked tomorrow and someone held a gun to my head and forced me to buy a new car, it'd be either another CR-V or a Forester/Outback. I like the Outback's styling better, but the Forester has a taller ceiling and a better seating position...or at least it feels like it.
Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
I would expect either vehicle to have enough power. Our 2008 CR-V (166 hp) has plenty of power for our tastes. Of course, the 265 hp MDX leaves it far behind, but I don't drive nearly as fast as I "mature in age". I think having kids has slowed me down.
I've sat in both (CX-5 was a '13 model) and I prefer the Forester by a moderate margin. The Mazda's seats are not comfortable to me and I don't care for the interior design. I think the Forester's dash is laid out more logically. I prefer the two-gauge cluster of the Forester vs. the CX-5's three-gauge cluster. Oh...and no discussion about small SUVs on BITOG can be considered complete until it's mentioned that only the Subaru can climb a hill of rollers...
If our CR-V was wrecked tomorrow and someone held a gun to my head and forced me to buy a new car, it'd be either another CR-V or a Forester/Outback. I like the Outback's styling better, but the Forester has a taller ceiling and a better seating position...or at least it feels like it.
If I were to keep a vehicle a long time,I'd go with the CR-V over both the Mazda or Subaru in a heartbeat.
Especially the new Touring model.The CVT does scare me a bit,though.
I would expect either vehicle to have enough power. Our 2008 CR-V (166 hp) has plenty of power for our tastes. Of course, the 265 hp MDX leaves it far behind, but I don't drive nearly as fast as I "mature in age". I think having kids has slowed me down.
I've sat in both (CX-5 was a '13 model) and I prefer the Forester by a moderate margin. The Mazda's seats are not comfortable to me and I don't care for the interior design. I think the Forester's dash is laid out more logically. I prefer the two-gauge cluster of the Forester vs. the CX-5's three-gauge cluster. Oh...and no discussion about small SUVs on BITOG can be considered complete until it's mentioned that only the Subaru can climb a hill of rollers...
If our CR-V was wrecked tomorrow and someone held a gun to my head and forced me to buy a new car, it'd be either another CR-V or a Forester/Outback. I like the Outback's styling better, but the Forester has a taller ceiling and a better seating position...or at least it feels like it.
If I were to keep a vehicle a long time,I'd go with the CR-V over both the Mazda or Subaru in a heartbeat.
Especially the new Touring model.The CVT does scare me a bit,though.
Originally Posted By: RamFan
I had a '14 CX-5 AWD with the 2.5l and loved it. I would've liked a bit more power but for a daily driver it served me greatly. I never had any reliability issues with it either.
The 2.0L in the CX-5 is said to be a real slug on the road.
I had a '14 CX-5 AWD with the 2.5l and loved it. I would've liked a bit more power but for a daily driver it served me greatly. I never had any reliability issues with it either.
The 2.0L in the CX-5 is said to be a real slug on the road.
I would still oil spray the Mazda annually for first few years regardless of their claimed metal treatment process. Mazda seems to be a hit and miss with rust and I would not want to be on the miss side.
Other than that Mazda makes some reliable and fun to drive cars and their DI implementation is one of the best so far.
Other than that Mazda makes some reliable and fun to drive cars and their DI implementation is one of the best so far.
Originally Posted By: Dually
I'm looking into buying a 2016 Mazda CX-5 2.5l with the tech package or a 2015 Subaru Forester 2.0L XT Touring.Both are great but I have heard that the Mazda 2.5L at 184hp is sluggish and that rust and unreliability happens a lot.I know that for 2016 a new infotainment and navigation system will be offered.The small redesign of the Mazda for 2016 makes it stand out.Does the Mazda seem cheap compared to the Subaru?Any insight would be great.Joe
We just bought a new 2015 Subaru Forester with the 2.5 engine. It seems like a well built car and hard to beat for the price. We got the Premium model and almost no other options. For me the Garmin I already have will be fine.
I suggest using TrueCar to find a dealer and price. We went to Brattleboro VT to pick up our car. Got it with 1.49% financing and $300 UNDER invoice. We drove to VT, signed some papers and drove home with the Subaru with 30 day VT temporary tags. Full tank of gas!
I'm looking into buying a 2016 Mazda CX-5 2.5l with the tech package or a 2015 Subaru Forester 2.0L XT Touring.Both are great but I have heard that the Mazda 2.5L at 184hp is sluggish and that rust and unreliability happens a lot.I know that for 2016 a new infotainment and navigation system will be offered.The small redesign of the Mazda for 2016 makes it stand out.Does the Mazda seem cheap compared to the Subaru?Any insight would be great.Joe
We just bought a new 2015 Subaru Forester with the 2.5 engine. It seems like a well built car and hard to beat for the price. We got the Premium model and almost no other options. For me the Garmin I already have will be fine.
I suggest using TrueCar to find a dealer and price. We went to Brattleboro VT to pick up our car. Got it with 1.49% financing and $300 UNDER invoice. We drove to VT, signed some papers and drove home with the Subaru with 30 day VT temporary tags. Full tank of gas!
Subaru Forester is Motor Trend SUV of the year. Fit and finish on subarus are excellent as well as ergonomics. Will be easier to sell down the road. KBB rates subaru as best resale value. KBB rates subaru as lowest cost to own. also 95% of Subaru vehicles sold in the last 10 years are still on the road today.
Out of those two choices Subaru wins.
Out of those two choices Subaru wins.
Originally Posted By: Dually
..."Does the Mazda seem cheap compared to the Subaru?"
Does the Mazda seem cheap compared to the Subaru?
Have you sat in them?
I just did an install on a brand new Impreza a couple of months ago. I thought to myself, "Wow, this looks like a Mazda interior......from 10 years ago!"
If you go back 10 years, the interior of the Impreza looked like a 10 year old Corolla interior.
Not that there is anything wrong with that. They're perfectly functional. Just dated.
I haven't driven a brand new Forester, but if earlier Subarus are any indication of how the current Forester drives, it is completely different than the Mazda.
Say what you will about Mazdas rusting or being unreliable, but Mazda is well above average in chassis tuning.
I drove the new "sporty" Camry, Altima, 2.0t Malibu...etc... while shopping for my wife's new car. (she didn't like the Subarus - said that they were "ugly") I drove all those new cars and I'm still driving my 10 year old Mazda6 because it just plain feels and handles better. The Camry SE and Malibu 2.0t probably actually generate more grip than my old near 200,000 mile Mazda, but the steering feels loose and imprecise and just doesn't transmit much back to me. It's a video game controller.
The Subarus that I have driven are not quite as responsive as a Mazda. They steer slower, corner differently.....more of a safety mindset than a driver's. Some drivers prefer that. To them, the Mazda's reactive steering might feel "twitchy" and the Subaru's lazy steering "stable".
..."Does the Mazda seem cheap compared to the Subaru?"
Does the Mazda seem cheap compared to the Subaru?
Have you sat in them?
I just did an install on a brand new Impreza a couple of months ago. I thought to myself, "Wow, this looks like a Mazda interior......from 10 years ago!"
If you go back 10 years, the interior of the Impreza looked like a 10 year old Corolla interior.
Not that there is anything wrong with that. They're perfectly functional. Just dated.
I haven't driven a brand new Forester, but if earlier Subarus are any indication of how the current Forester drives, it is completely different than the Mazda.
Say what you will about Mazdas rusting or being unreliable, but Mazda is well above average in chassis tuning.
I drove the new "sporty" Camry, Altima, 2.0t Malibu...etc... while shopping for my wife's new car. (she didn't like the Subarus - said that they were "ugly") I drove all those new cars and I'm still driving my 10 year old Mazda6 because it just plain feels and handles better. The Camry SE and Malibu 2.0t probably actually generate more grip than my old near 200,000 mile Mazda, but the steering feels loose and imprecise and just doesn't transmit much back to me. It's a video game controller.
The Subarus that I have driven are not quite as responsive as a Mazda. They steer slower, corner differently.....more of a safety mindset than a driver's. Some drivers prefer that. To them, the Mazda's reactive steering might feel "twitchy" and the Subaru's lazy steering "stable".
Compared to the 2.0L turbo Subaru XT the Mazda will be pig in acceleration. Mazda no longer offers powerful cars just adequate but very fuel efficient.
The AWD of Subaru is significantly better then Mazda but it may not be something you absolutely require.
Both are excellent but different.
The AWD of Subaru is significantly better then Mazda but it may not be something you absolutely require.
Both are excellent but different.
Why not get a good car instead, like a Ford, Toyota, or Honda?
Originally Posted By: rjundi
Compared to the 2.0L turbo Subaru XT the Mazda will be pig in acceleration. Mazda no longer offers powerful cars just adequate but very fuel efficient.
That's long been the case for piston engine Mazdas. There were a few exceptions of course but they've primarily been about chassis and driveability.
Originally Posted By: zzyzzx
Why not get a good car instead, like a Ford, Toyota, or Honda?
Every component that has failed on my Mazda has been emblazoned with FoMoCo.
Compared to the 2.0L turbo Subaru XT the Mazda will be pig in acceleration. Mazda no longer offers powerful cars just adequate but very fuel efficient.
That's long been the case for piston engine Mazdas. There were a few exceptions of course but they've primarily been about chassis and driveability.
Originally Posted By: zzyzzx
Why not get a good car instead, like a Ford, Toyota, or Honda?
Every component that has failed on my Mazda has been emblazoned with FoMoCo.
the mazda is a higher quality car than the subaru in just about every way other than the AWD system.
Why don't you drive one and find out yourself? The rust stuff is just internet folklore. It is no worse than any other brand. I can walk out in the parking lot and find rust on every make out there.
Why don't you drive one and find out yourself? The rust stuff is just internet folklore. It is no worse than any other brand. I can walk out in the parking lot and find rust on every make out there.
Originally Posted By: Colt
Originally Posted By: RamFan
I had a '14 CX-5 AWD with the 2.5l and loved it. I would've liked a bit more power but for a daily driver it served me greatly. I never had any reliability issues with it either.
The 2.0L in the CX-5 is said to be a real slug on the road.
It is not a slug, at least with the MTX anyway.
Originally Posted By: RamFan
I had a '14 CX-5 AWD with the 2.5l and loved it. I would've liked a bit more power but for a daily driver it served me greatly. I never had any reliability issues with it either.
The 2.0L in the CX-5 is said to be a real slug on the road.
It is not a slug, at least with the MTX anyway.
gathermewool
Site Donor 2023
The '14+ Forester XT has a few standard features that made me choose it:
FA20DIT: This is a direct-injection, twin-scroll turbo engine that will produce boost quickly and easily. It's a closer comparison to other 2.0 turbo CUV's, like the Escape, not the N/A CX-5.
AWD: Even the lowest trim Forester XT comes standard with X-mode, which uses more-aggressive AWD control logic to increase initial front-rear lock-up, increased VDC input, etc. Again, the CX-5 won't compare.
I don't particularly consider my Fozzy seats to be comfortable, but the rest of the vehicle is, and the practicality made it a winner for me. I was also very surprised how well the CVT functioned with the turbo. Coming for me an STI manual Tranny I was expecting to be disappointed.
FA20DIT: This is a direct-injection, twin-scroll turbo engine that will produce boost quickly and easily. It's a closer comparison to other 2.0 turbo CUV's, like the Escape, not the N/A CX-5.
AWD: Even the lowest trim Forester XT comes standard with X-mode, which uses more-aggressive AWD control logic to increase initial front-rear lock-up, increased VDC input, etc. Again, the CX-5 won't compare.
I don't particularly consider my Fozzy seats to be comfortable, but the rest of the vehicle is, and the practicality made it a winner for me. I was also very surprised how well the CVT functioned with the turbo. Coming for me an STI manual Tranny I was expecting to be disappointed.
Originally Posted By: badtlc
the mazda is a higher quality car than the subaru in just about every way other than the AWD system.
Why don't you drive one and find out yourself? The rust stuff is just internet folklore. It is no worse than any other brand. I can walk out in the parking lot and find rust on every make out there.
Agreed; the OP needs to drive both and make the call. And as for rust, last week I had my 2007 MS3 up on jack stands to R&R a recalled aftermarket rear ARB and the underside had not a speck of rust. Of course I've only had it for eight years and almost 150,000 miles- I'm sure the tin worm is lying in wait.
the mazda is a higher quality car than the subaru in just about every way other than the AWD system.
Why don't you drive one and find out yourself? The rust stuff is just internet folklore. It is no worse than any other brand. I can walk out in the parking lot and find rust on every make out there.
Agreed; the OP needs to drive both and make the call. And as for rust, last week I had my 2007 MS3 up on jack stands to R&R a recalled aftermarket rear ARB and the underside had not a speck of rust. Of course I've only had it for eight years and almost 150,000 miles- I'm sure the tin worm is lying in wait.
I have not driven either car in the OP, however I do have experience with both brands.
I used to own a 2005 Legacy GT 5MT that I bought new. I traded it in on a 2012 Mazda 6 iSport 5AT (also new). Even losing 80hp and AWD, IMHO the Mazda is a better car, interior, mechanical, ride comfort.
as for being a slug, you have to test that and see. Someone might think it's quick, someone else might think it is a dog. Have to test that out.
I used to own a 2005 Legacy GT 5MT that I bought new. I traded it in on a 2012 Mazda 6 iSport 5AT (also new). Even losing 80hp and AWD, IMHO the Mazda is a better car, interior, mechanical, ride comfort.
as for being a slug, you have to test that and see. Someone might think it's quick, someone else might think it is a dog. Have to test that out.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked