Trading my Mazda CX-5 for a 2014 Subaru Forester XT

Subarus are good cars, congratulations on the purchase. I wasn't much happy with my 2013 Cx-5 also which is why I got the 2014.
 
I did look and tested the 2014 CX-5 GT, but when I saw and drove the 2014 Subaru Forester XT said THIS IS IT!
 
Ok folks...Got to be honest here...I'm not happy with my 2013 CX-5 Touring, I will be trading my CX-5 for a 2014 Subaru Forester XT.http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/suvs/1301_2014_subaru_forester_first_drive/viewall.html

I'm willing to trade gas mileage for power.

(rolleyes)

I'm looking at the CX-5, Forester, and to a lesser extent the Escape, CR-V and Rav 4. My choices would be between the CX-5 and Forester, but I'd like to know what bothers you about the CX-5 (is it the horsepower?). The Forester is a solid choice, but the base engine (non-XT) is less HP than the CX-5, and I've heard very bad things about their NAV system (the same in the BRZ). As well, some reviewers mention that the Forester, which rides higher than typical crossover, can feel more "boat-like" on highways.

With that said, the XT is a compelling choice. But FYI, you won't get close to the EPA fuel economy. Nowhere close. I have a Mazdaspeed 3 (approx 265 HP with a turbo), and once you get on the boost your fuel economy goes in the dumps. The EPA testing does not really spool that turbo, so in real world driving the turbo is always spooling and sucking up your gas. I'm lucky to get 23-24 mpg in mixed driving (mostly highway, actually). But if that doesn't bother you, then the XT is indeed a compelling choice. It's just soooo expensive if you load it up with options!
 
I'm looking at the CX-5, Forester, and to a lesser extent the Escape, CR-V and Rav 4. My choices would be between the CX-5 and Forester, but I'd like to know what bothers you about the CX-5 (is it the horsepower?). The Forester is a solid choice, but the base engine (non-XT) is less HP than the CX-5, and I've heard very bad things about their NAV system (the same in the BRZ). As well, some reviewers mention that the Forester, which rides higher than typical crossover, can feel more "boat-like" on highways.

With that said, the XT is a compelling choice. But FYI, you won't get close to the EPA fuel economy. Nowhere close. I have a Mazdaspeed 3 (approx 265 HP with a turbo), and once you get on the boost your fuel economy goes in the dumps. The EPA testing does not really spool that turbo, so in real world driving the turbo is always spooling and sucking up your gas. I'm lucky to get 23-24 mpg in mixed driving (mostly highway, actually). But if that doesn't bother you, then the XT is indeed a compelling choice. It's just soooo expensive if you load it up with options!

I have only tested the XT, it's just another level of car. Smoother ride, quitter, bigger inside, more leg room on rear, powerful, The one I'm getting has a 34387.00 sticker price, My price will be 32333.00. Forgot to mention the huge sunroof, storage in the back. Gas mileage it's not an issue for me.

The only thing it does not have is the technology package witch I really can leave without it.
 
Everyone's personal preference I guess. We have the 2013 AWD GT and very very happy with it in every way. The 2014 has way more power as I definitely noticed ater test driving one for the heck of it, if I wanted to trade it in I would have done so for a 2014 CX-5 but naaah.

Did you consider the 2014 CX-5 at all? Good luck to you and the new Forester :)
 
In 2014, the 2.5L CX-5 ranks among the top of the class for small SUVs for acceleration and power with the exception of the turbo offerings. The Ford Escape 2.0 turbo is another high HP/torque offering like the Forester but I don't think it has a CVT like the latest Forester.

Did you try test driving the turbo Ford Escape also or did the torque from the turbo Forester just sell you immediately?
 
Holy crap - That thing is over $7k more than we paid for our FWD GT.

For that kind of money you've now opened up a TON more possibilities.
 
Holy crap - That thing is over $7k more than we paid for our FWD GT.

For that kind of money you've now opened up a TON more possibilities.

"That thing" is been offered to me at: 32333.00, let me know where you got a GT for 25333 so I can send my brother right now. Also, let's not forget this is a real AWD.
 
"That thing" is been offered to me at: 32333.00, let me know where you got a GT for 25333 so I can send my brother right now. Also, let's not forget this is a real AWD.

I'm asking just because I know nothing about this... How is Mazda's AWD not a real AWD. I've actually seen fairly good reviews of the Mazda AWD technology, some stating that it is almost comparable to Subaru's.
 
AWD doesn't even matter to be honest. Wish I had gone for the FWD and spent the extra money on a Snow Tire/Wheel combination. I've learned my lesson.
 
AWD doesn't even matter to be honest. Wish I had gone for the FWD and spent the extra money on a Snow Tire/Wheel combination. I've learned my lesson.

It may not be down in NJ, but up here in Quebec, where we litteraly get over 10 feet of snow each winter, snow tires (which are mandatory), even very good ones, don't always get you out of trouble... I've been stuck in snow banks more than my share.
 
:) you're right, we get major snowfall like once every 5-6 years. Yeah, you guys get bombarded up north. How did the CX-5 handle all that stuff? I ask cause I drove in the snow maybe like twice this year with stock tires and it handled itself very very well. I felt safe.
 
It may not be down in NJ, but up here in Quebec, where we litteraly get over 10 feet of snow each winter, snow tires (which are mandatory), even very good ones, don't always get you out of trouble... I've been stuck in snow banks more than my share.

Typically AWD only helps you accelerating out of wet/snow/ice, since all 4 wheels are moving. It does nothing to help you stop or help you steer, you'll still slip and slide (as I found out on my AWD Audi with worn-down all-season tires years ago!). So the combination of AWD and snow tires is likely the best for northern countries if you want ultimate peace of mind. This is why I'm looking at getting the AWD CX-5, although I'll likely just keep fresh all-season tires on it (snow tires are considered "worn" at 6/32", while all-seasons are "worn" at 2/32". So in the winter, you won't be safe with nearly worn all-season tires, a lot of people don't realize that).
 
:) you're right, we get major snowfall like once every 5-6 years. Yeah, you guys get bombarded up north. How did the CX-5 handle all that stuff? I ask cause I drove in the snow maybe like twice this year with stock tires and it handled itself very very well. I felt safe.

Don't know, I just got mine, and no "white stuff" has fallen in significant amounts since. We are expecting about 6 inches starting this afternoon (yes... mid April!). If I get to drive in it, I'll post my experience. A thread was started on that subject maybe two months back, you might want to check it out. Comments were pretty good if I remember correctly.
 
This is why I waited for the 2014's to come out I figured if I had bought the 2013 I would miss having the power on the highway. Didn't want to buy the 2013 and then regret it and end up trading it in.
 
Typically AWD only helps you accelerating out of wet/snow/ice, since all 4 wheels are moving. It does nothing to help you stop or help you steer, you'll still slip and slide (as I found out on my AWD Audi with worn-down all-season tires years ago!). So the combination of AWD and snow tires is likely the best for northern countries if you want ultimate peace of mind. This is why I'm looking at getting the AWD CX-5, although I'll likely just keep fresh all-season tires on it (snow tires are considered "worn" at 6/32", while all-seasons are "worn" at 2/32". So in the winter, you won't be safe with nearly worn all-season tires, a lot of people don't realize that).

I completely agree with you. Both snow tires and AWD is the safest combination. I also expect AWD to help mostly in acceleration, and certainly not in stoping (it might actually have the oppisite effect, since you are heavier). I would expect it would help somewhat insteering, or at least stability though, since AWD can ajust traction as necessary to keep you going in a straight line... I feel as though, when I run trough a large puddle of water, it does not "pull" as much to one side. I thought this was because of AWD, but it just might be because the CX-5 is just a bigger vehicle than my old Protege5.
 
Congrats on new Subie, the turbo should give the extra power desired. It's only money.
 
Back